Sahaba 4

The book Maktûbât by ’Urwa-t-ul-wuthqâ Muhammad Ma’thûm Fârûqî is in the Fârisî language and consists of three volumes. There are two hundred and thirty-nine (239) letters in the first volume, one hundred and fifty-eight (158) letters in the second volume, and two hundred and fifty-five (255) letters in the third volume. The following are the English translations of six of those six hundred and fifty-two (652) letters.

May Haqq subhânahu wa ta’âlâ bless you with realization of your religious and worldly wishes! The medicine for protection against the harms of worldly flavours and transient blessings is to use them in a manner compatible with the Sharî’at. In other words, it is to obey Allâhu ta’âlâ’s commands and prohibitions. Those flavours will be harmful if they are not utilized compatibly with the Sharî’at. They will cause Allâhu ta’âlâ’s wrath and torment. Maximum possible abstinence from enjoying them is the safest course to follow for real and definite salvation. Those who cannot manage that degree of abstinence should use the medicine requisite for protection. Thereby they will be safe from their harms. Shame on those people who can neither manage the necessary abstinence nor protect themselves by using medicine and who, thereby, leave themselves vulnerable to patent disasters and afflictions in addition to a pathetic deprivation from eternal happiness! [Islam does not prohibit worldly flavours and pleasures. What it prohibits is an exorbitant and bestial indulgence in them.] So pitiable are those people who succumb to the indulgences of their nafs and fail to enjoy the worldly flavours in manners and doses prescribed by the Sharî’at, thereby divesting themselves of the felicitous and everlasting flavours of Paradise. Do they not know that Allâhu ta’âlâ sees all? Have they never heard that enjoyment of worldly blessings within the limits of moderation drawn by Islam’s Sharî’at is the only way of acquiring immunity from harms? There is the inevitable and imminent Judgment Day, when all the worldly activities of each and every person will be laid before them. [Apparently, those who chase after worldly pleasures and tastes do not seem to believe that there will be rising after death, that people who adapt themselves to Islam’s Sharî’at will attain the blessings of Paradise, whereas those who flout the Sharî’at will be subjected to the fire of Hell. Paradoxically, Europeans and Americans, whom these deniers of the life to come look on as modern and great people, do believe in Paradise and Hell. They crowd into churches. Embrace the worse features of Europeans by imitating their immoralities and dishonest acts in the name of modernism, on the one hand, and criticize your countrymen, calling them regressive and bigoted people, on account of their belief in the Hereafter, –which is an asset they share with Europeans–, on the other: this ludicrous oddity unveils the fetid inner intentions. We should not believe these wretched people, who are merely slaves to their sensuous desires and pleasures.] How lucky for those who have attained love of Allâhu ta’âlâ by abstaining from His prohibitions in the world, when the Promised Day comes! How lucky for those who do not succumb to the temptations of the sequinned worldly life, who fear their Rabb (Allâhu ta’âlâ) and curb their sensuous desires, who advise their household and their inferiors that they should perform their daily salâts steadily, [and who teach their spouses and daughters how to cover themselves in a manner prescribed by the Sharî’at when they go out!] How lucky for them! Salâms to those people who follow the way to felicity shown by Allâhu ta’âlâ and who adapt themselves to Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’!

Man’s own nafs is the most adamant obstructive curtain between man and Allâhu ta’âlâ. “Abandon thy nafs, and come to Me! Thy very self is the cloud hiding the sun thou art after! Know thyself,” says the divine Word. Pushing the nafs away from between requires a conscientious and delectable process [centred on the heart]. It cannot be described by words and writings. Nor is it something that can be learned by perusal. It has to be a gift that one was endowed with in the eternal past, and it has to be primed by the attraction of Allâhu ta’âlâ. Since we live in a world of causations, a Walî’s sohbat will suffice, with the proviso that you should love the Walî. The more you love him, the more will you receive of the fayz and ma’rifats radiating from his heart, attaining perfection at the end. The hadîth-i-sherîf which reads, “A person will be together with his beloved one,” expresses this fact.

Existence of the Ahlullah, [i.e., Awliyâ, Men of Allah,] is Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Compassion (for His slaves), when they are alive and after death alike. The fayz and barakat which they radiate as long as they live, continue after their death as well. After their death their fayz and barakat maintain their flow into the hearts of those people who do not deviate from their path. It is like the annihilation of the nûrs (lights) of Sunnat by the bid’ats which have been invented afterwards. Try to perform useful deeds! Race one another in prayers and worship! Deem it a source of happiness [and profit] to serve the children of the deceased! Please them in a manner compatible with the Sharî’at!

My dear son! The world is sweet in appearance, and yet venomous in essence. It is quite worthless. A person who is caught in its trap can never be free again. A person who dies with that poison is a mere carrion. It is madness to lose one’s heart to it. It is like sequinned filth, or sweetened poison. A wise person will not fall for such false and deceitful beauty. He will not set his heart on vicious and harmful pleasures. He will spend his sojourn in this life trying to find favour in his Owner’s eyes. He will earn what will be useful for him in the Hereafter. He will do his duties as a slave of Allâhu ta’âlâ. He will hold fast to the commandments of Allâhu ta’âlâ. He will abstain from His prohibitions, i.e. harâms. Shame on those who run after harmful things instead of doing so!

I’m afraid of hurting someone truely dear;
Day and night I am burning with this strong fear!

[The world, (in this context,) means harmful things which Allâhu ta’âlâ dislikes and prohibits. A person who abstains from the harâms is one who has not fallen for the temptations of the world. Allâhu ta’âlâ does not prohibit any worldly tastes or pleasures. What He prohibits is excess and overindulgence in enjoying them. He commands to utilize them in the useful and decent way which He dictates.]

We were brought to this world so that we should acquire the ma’rifat of Allâhu ta’âlâ, (i.e. so that we should know Him properly). There are two kinds of ma’rifat (knowing Allâhu ta’âlâ). One of them is acquired scientifically, i.e. by way of observation and inference, [thinking]. This kind of ma’rifat is taught by the Islamic scholars. The other kind is acquired by way of kashf and shuhûd, [which takes place in the heart]. This (latter) kind of ma’rifat comes from experts of Tasawwuf, [i.e. from Awliyâ]. The former kind of ma’rifat is scientific and is acquired mentally. The latter is a spiritual state which exists in the heart. Whereas the former does not suspend the existence of the ’ârif, (person who has attained ma’rifat), the latter does; for, this (latter) kind of ma’rifat is to annihilate one’s self in the ma’rûf, (i.e. the known one, i.e. Allâhu ta’âlâ).

The former (kind of ma’rifat) is ’ilm-i-husûlî. It involves detailed mental comprehension. The latter involves simple recognition, without any contextual details. For, in this kind of ma’rifat Haqq is the only existence. Man has ceased to exist. In the former, the nafs maintains its denial. In fact, the nafs exists, and so do all its vicious attributes. Therefore, its recalcitrant and avid nature has not ceased to exist. Nor has it rid itself of its characteristic excess and intemperance. Îmân exists only in appearance, and deeds and religious practices are on a perfunctory level. The nafs perpetuates its disbelief and animosity against its Mawlâ [Owner, Allâhu ta’âlâ]. It is declared in a hadîth-i-qudsî: “Know your nafs as your enemy! For it is inimical towards Me.” This (former) kind of ma’rifat has been termed îmân-i-mejâzî (symbolic belief). Because man himself has ceased to exist in the latter kind of ma’rifat, the nafs has become a Believer. This kind of ma’rifat [îmân] is inextinguishable. It is therefore termed îmân-i-haqîqî (real îmân). The religious practices also are real. The following invocation is offered in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Yâ Rabbî (O my Allah)! I ask of Thee an îmân (belief) which will not end in kufr (unbelief, denial).” It is this kind of îmân which is implied in the hundred and thirty-sixth (136) âyat of Nisâ sûra: “O ye who believe! Believe in Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Messenger! ...” (4-136). Imâm Ahmad ibn Hanbal, with all his ultimate grade in knowledge and ijtihâd, consulted to Bishr-i-Hafî to join his disciples for the acquisition of that (latter kind of) ma’rifat. When he was asked why, he said, “His ’ârif (knowledge) of Allâhu ta’âlâ is better than mine.” Abû Hanîfa Nu’mân Qûfî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ desisted from ijtihâd and spent the final two years of his life in seclusion. Afterwards a dream was reported to contain his following acknowledgement: “Nu’mân would have perished had it not been for the last two years.” His seclusion was intended to attain perfection in the latter kind of ma’rifat and thereby to attain perfection in îmân, which is the natural outcome of that ma’rifat. He did so despite his unattainable grade both in knowledge and in worship. As a matter of fact, no religious practice could equal the grade of ijtihâd, and no other act of worship could make one attain the grade of teaching. Perfection of deeds is dependent on the perfection of îmân. The nûrâniyyat (lightsomeness) in acts of worship is dependent upon the degree of ikhlâs (doing something with the only and pure intention of attaining love and approval of Allâhu ta’âlâ). And the perfection of îmân and the degree of ikhlâs are dependent on ma’rifat. Since this ma’rifat and the real îmân are dependent on fanâ (being nonexistent, dissolution of one’s existence in the existence of Allâhu ta’âlâ), and on the dying of one’s nafs before one’s death; when a person’s fanâ is perfect, his îmân will be perfect as well. For this reason, the îmân of Siddîq ekber weighed heavier than the total îmân of all this Ummat (Muslims). It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Were the îmân of Abû Bakr weighed against the îmân of my entire Ummat, Abû Bakr’s îmân would prove heavier.” For he was peerless in fanâ. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “If you want to see a corpse walking, see Abû Quhâfa’s son.” Abû Bakr’s having been pointed out as a paragon for fanâ attested to his perfection in fanâ. In fact, all the Sahâba had attained fanâ. How lucky for a person who has attained that ma’rifat! We should run to the place where such a person is seen. Shameful to say, what must be seeked is being forsaken, and things which we are advised to extirpate are being repaired. What explanations and excuses are we going to provide on the Rising Day, and how are we going to face such a shameful situation?

Man’s honour is in his îmân and ma’rifat, not in his property or position. Try to make your îmân firmer! Make efforts to promote your grade in ma’rifat! It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “If a person works for the Hereafter, Allâhu ta’âlâ will make him attain all his wishes. As for those who always run after worldly concerns; He will perish them.” If a person has difficulty in making a living, it is permissible for him to work. It will be good if he earns. If he cannot, then he should not be persistent about it. Persistence will be futile. In fact, it will be harmful.

Allâhu ta’âlâ has mercy on all people in the world. He sends useful things to everybody. As a kindness to those Believers who deserve Hell (on account of the sins they have committed in the world), He will forgive them and bless them with Paradise. He, alone, creates every living being, keeps them always in existence, and protects all against fears and horrors. Trusting ourselves to the honourable Name of such an almighty being as Allah, we begin to write this book.

Praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ! Prayers and salutations be to His most beloved Prophet, Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’! Benedictions be to the pure Ahl-i-Bayt of that exalted Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’, and to each and every one of his faithful Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’!

It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf which is written in the abridged version of Tadhkira Qurtubî: “Fitna will break out among my Sahâba. For the sake of the sohbats they have had with me, Allâhu ta’âlâ will forgive those who will partake in the fitna. People after them, however, will rekindle the fitna by repeatedly blathering on the events; they will go to Hell on account of their undue concern.” The great Islamic scholar Imâm Rabbânî Ahmad Fârûqî Serhendî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’, who passed away in India in 1034 [1624 A.D.], sent letters to every country in order to teach the creed of Ahl as-Sunnat and the true way of Islam, as well as the fact that Tasawwuf was not something distinct from the Islamic faith. His letters, more than five hundred, were compiled and printed in three volumes. The thirty-sixth letter of the second volume enlarges on the fitna among the Sahâba.

It was during the time of the third Khalîfa Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ when a Jew of Yemen named Abdullah bin Saba’ fomented the earliest fitna of separatism in Islam. People who had fallen victim to his misguidance mingled with the Sahâba. Throughout history they have been supported by masons and Jews. From time to time they have had recourse to violence, thus undermining Islam from within and causing considerable bloodshed among Muslims. The tragedy runs counter to Islam’s instructions on unity and brotherly affection.

In the course of time, enemies of the Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ broke into twelve sectarian groups, maintaining their unison only in their systematic and cleverly planned activities to deceive and divide Muslims. They allege that the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ were inimical towards one another, and cast all sorts of ignominious aspersions on those great Islamic celebrities on the chimerical ground that they refused to pay homage to Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’. These instigators of fitna and fesâd, who represent themselves as enlightened men of religion or up-to-date writers, stigmatize the benevolent Sunnî religious teachers as uneducated fuddy-duddies, trying thereby to derogate and blemish those blessed teachers, who have been endeavouring to awaken the Muslims by divulging and refuting their abominable lies and slanders. As the aspersions cast by these abhorrent instigators will not detract from the high honour of the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’, likewise, their attacks will recoil on them, adding to the value and honour of those virtuous teachers.

In order to protect our Muslim brothers from believing the sequinned lies of these subversive people, whose purpose is to separate brothers from one another, we have translated the thirty-sixth letter from the Fârisî into Turkish, (and thence into English,) and entitled it The Earliest Fitna in Islam. We are certain that when the valuable younger generation read this letter with objectivity, their pure souls and unsoiled consciences will help them see that the Ahl as-Sunnat scholars are right.

May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect Muslims against divisions! May He unite us in the correct Sunnî path, which we all like and approve of! May He protect us from believing the lies of the enemies of Islam, and from falling into their traps! Âmîn.

The thirty-sixth letter of the second volume of the book Maktûbât by Imâm Rabbânî Mujaddîd-i-alf-i-thânî Shaikh Ahmad Fârûqî Serhendî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ proves the greatness of the Ashâb-i-kirâm and quotes the remarks made about the Ashâb-i-kirâm both by the scholars of the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat and by other people in heretical groups. It explains that the Shiite sect was the produce of the earliest fitna in Islam, that the Sunnî group are not eccentric like the Shiites, and that they do not follow a benighted and short-sighted course like the Khwârij (Khârijîs), either, and lauds and praises the Ahl-i-Bayt of our Master, the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’.

In the name of Allah I begin to write this letter of mine. Praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ! Prayers and salutations be to His exalted Prophet! Benedictions be to the Ahl-i-Bayt of that exalted Prophet, to all his Sahâba, and to all Muslims!

One of the greatest and most valuable gifts and blessings of Allâhu ta’âlâ is for a person to love the followers of the right path, to yearn to meet and talk with those fortunate people, to hear the words of those great people, and to read their books. The Mukhbir-i-sâdiq, i.e. Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’, who always tells the truth, stated, “Al-mer’u ma’a man ahabba,” which means, “If a person loves someone, he will be with him in both this world and the next.” Hence, if a person loves great religious persons, he will be with them and get a share from their spiritual closeness to Allâhu ta’âlâ. According to the reports given by my valuable son Khwâja Sharaf-ad-dîn Husayn, who is a man of choice wording and a good prospect for spiritual promotions, you possess the utterly beautiful moral qualities required for that great blessing. With all your miscellaneous occupations and complicated cares, you do not forget about those great people. Beleaguered by all sorts of worldly problems as you are, you do not miss that most valuable blessing. Infinite praise and gratitude be to Allâhu ta’âlâ for that greatest favour of His! Indeed, your happiness and blessed attainments will reproduce happiness and attainments for many another person. Your salvation will cause others’ salvation and attainment of peace. As is reported, again, by my son, you have been reading this faqîr’s (Hadrat Imâm Rabbânî’s) writings and cherishing my words. He said it would be very useful if I wrote a few words to you. So I attempt to write a few words at my son’s request.

Recently, most people in India have been discussing subjects such as right of caliphate and making comments on the behaviours and attitudes of the Sahâba. Quite a few people have been frankly saying and writing their personal meagre heretical opinions and narrow views on this esoteric subject, which is one of the most delicate branches of the Islamic sciences. They do not hesitate to attach wrong meanings to âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs, or to try to hush up the true and rightful words of the Islamic scholars, in order to prove that they are right. I have therefore considered it requisite to reveal the truth by writing a couple of facts on the subject, informing the Muslims about the true and rightful words of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat and refuting the heresies of the aberrant groups of bid’at with the help of documentary proofs.

O my pure-souled and noble-natured brother! Scholars of the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat ‘rahimahumullâhu ta’âlâ unanimously state that it is necessary to “hold the Shaikhayn superior and love the two sons-in-law.” In other words, Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar are superior to all the other Sahâbîs, and Hadrat ’Uthmân and Hadrat Alî should be loved. Every Muslim in the right path called Ahl as-Sunnat wa-l-jamâ’at is to hold the former two (Khalîfas) in higher esteem, feeling warm affection for the latter two.

That Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar are the highest (of all the Sahâba) is a fact on which all the Sahâba were unanimous. This unanimity of the Sahâba was reported to us by the Tâbi’în-i-izâm. The greater ones of our religious imâms, such as Imâm Shâfi’î, inform us that the unanimity was the case. Hadrat Abul Hasan Ash’arî, one of our two religious leaders in credal matters, states: “That Abû Bakr and ’Umar are the highest Muslims in the entire Ummat is an absolute fact.” Imâm Zahabî writes that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was Khalîfa and was therefore holding the entire state power and authority in his hands when he said to a large audience of the Sahâba, “Abû Bakr and ’Umar are the highest of this Ummat,” and adds that their superiority is a definite fact which has reached us through (an authentic way of narration called) tawâtur. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ stated: “After our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, Abû Bakr is the (second) highest human being. ’Umar is next after him. And next comes someone else.” His son Muhammad bin Hanafiyya, who was among the audience, said, “You are the highest next after ’Umar!” Imâm Bukhârî reports that Hadrat Alî’s reply was: “I am only one of the Muslims.” So high is the number of the dependable and trustworthy people who acknowledge the superiority of Abû Bakr and ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’, that it has become a tawâtur, i.e. a narration which is wâjib (necessary, compulsory) to believe. He who denies it must either be ignorant or strongly bigoted and obdurate. Abd-ur-Razzaq bin Alî Lâhijî (d. 1051 [1642 A.D.]), an eminent Shiite scholar, saw the incontrovertibly palpable truth and acknowledged that the two Imâms were the highest, stating, “Since Alî acknowledged that Abû Bakr and ’Umar were superior to him, I say so, too. I believe in the fact that both of them were superior to him. If Hadrat Alî had not stated that they were higher, I would not say so, either. I say as he did because I love Hadrat Alî. It would be sinful not to agree with him and to still profess love of him.”

Because there were fitnas and tumults during the caliphates of Hadrat ’Uthman and Hadrat Alî, the two blessed sons-in-law of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, the people’s hearts were rather depressed and cold. A general feeling of hostility and discord was prevalent among them. Therefore, the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat stated that the two Khatanas (In-laws), or Sons-in-law, should be loved. Thereby they anticipated any possible defamatory essay against Rasûlullah’s Sahâba and closed the remotest loophole which might be exploited for fomenting grudge against any one of the Khalîfas, who were the representatives of the Messenger of Allah.

As is seen, love of Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is an essential condition for being a Sunnî Muslim. He who dislikes Hadrat Alî is not in the group of Ahl as-Sunnat. He is called a Khârijî (pl. Khwârij). On the other hand, a person who is inordinate, excessive and eccentric in the affection due to Hadrat Alî; who asserts that loving Hadrat Alî requires swearing at Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba; and who deviates from the path guided by the Ashâb-i-kirâm, the Tâbi’în-i-izâm and the Salaf as-Salihîn by vilifying the Ashâb-i-kirâm, is a heretic. As is seen, this last group are overzealous in their affection for Hadrat Alî, whereas the Khwârij bear grudge against Hadrat Alî, which obscures their insight and prevents them from recognizing that Lion of Allah. It is the group of Ahl as-Sunnat who have followed the moderate course without allowing the slightest digression towards either extremity. Truth is definitely in the medial course, and not in either of the two eccentric directions. Either one of the aberrations is both detestable and perilous. According to a narration reported by Ahmad ibn Hanbal ‘rahima hullâhu ta’âlâ’, Hadrat Alî quotes Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ as having said to him: “Yâ Alî! You will be identical with Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’. Jews have pursued an inimical policy against him, calumniating his blessed mother Hadrat Maryam (Mary). Christians, by contrast, have doted on him unduly, attributing preposterous grades to him. That is, they have called him Son of God.” Afterwards, Hadrat Alî explicated the hadîth-i-sherîf as follows: “Two groups of people will perish because of me. One group will overflow the measure of affection due towards me, overstating my faculties and attributing to me merits that I do not really have. The other group, my enemies, will slander me.” Hence, the Khwârij were compared to Jews, whereas the intemperate adherents have symbolized Christians. Both groups are apart from the right path. It is crass ignorance to assert that the Sunnî Muslims dislike Hadrat Alî, or to associate love of Hadrat Alî with being a Shiite. One thing should be known well: The heresy in this matter is based not on love of Hadrat Alî, but on animosity against three Khalîfas of the Messenger of Allah. What is wicked is to cast aspersions on the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Imâm-i-Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ states, as is versified in the following couplet:

If love of Muhammad’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ family involves being
A Shiite, I’m one, be it known, every genie’n human being!

In other words, Shiites say that to be a Shiite means to love Muhammad’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ Âl (family), i.e. the Ahl-i-Bayt. If being a Shiite really involves love of the Ahl-i-Bayt, then Shiites are people whom we love and respect very much. What is wrong, however, is animosity against people other than the Ahl-i-Bayt.

(Hadrat Alî and Hadrat Fâtima and their children are called the Âl-i-Rasûl, or the Ahl-i-Bayt.)

Certainly, the Sunnî Muslims are the only people who love the Ahl-i-Bayt of the Messenger of Allah properly. And certainly, again, they are the only true followers of the Ahl-i-Bayt. If a person who professes love of the Ahl-i-Bayt and claims to be following them does not nurse a grudge against the Sahâba and believes that the wars among the Sahâba were based on benevolent reasons, he is a Sunnî Muslim. This saves him from being a heretic. For, to hate the Ahl-i-Bayt means to be a Khârijî. A Sunnî Muslim both loves the Ahl-i-Bayt and respects the Sahâba and loves them all. As is seen, being a person without a certain Madhhab is a concomitant of enmity against the Sahâba. For, the Ahl-i-Bayt are Sahâbîs at the same time. And, to be a Sunnî Muslim means to love all the Sahâba. A wise and reasonable person simply does not hold enmity against the Sahâba above love of the Ahl-i-Bayt. Because he loves Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, he loves all his Sahâba.

Some people allege that the group of Ahl as-Sunnat are hostile towards the Ahl-i-Bayt. No degree of dismay felt at their extremely wrong and utterly detestable allegation would be too much. Indeed, love of the Ahl-i-Bayt is held by the Sunnî Muslims as the greatest source of hope for dying with îmân, (i.e. as Believers). The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat say that dying as a Believer requires loving the Ahl-i-Bayt very much. This faqîr’s (Imâm Rabbânî’s) father was a scholar. He was very profound both in the zâhirî sciences and in the bâtinî ones. He would always inculcate love of the Ahl-i-Bayt upon people. He would say that affection for them would be very useful at the time of death, helping one to die as a Believer. Afterwards, when my father was ill on his deathbed, I was by his side. He was spending his final minutes in this life. He was about to drop his last tenuous links with the world. I remembered him saying to love the Ahl-i-Bayt very much. I asked, “How much is your love of them at this moment?” He was almost completely unconscious when he breathed: “I have been bathing in the ocean of love of Ahl-i-Bayt.” I made hamd-u-thenâ (praise and gratitude) to Allâhu ta’âlâ for my father’s answer. Love of the Ahl-i-Bayt is capital for the Muslims of Ahl-i-Sunnat. Some people do not realize this fact. Turning away from the correct and moderate love held by the Sunnî Muslims, they follow an eccentric course. Disdainful of a manner of love which is not excessive or inordinate, they stigmatize the Sunnî Muslims as Khwârij. They do not understand that between excess in one direction and the other is a medial way, a moderate and correct way. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat are the only people who have been blessed with the honour of finding the correct and right way, the medial way between the two wrong ways, one of which is unduly high and the other despicably low. May Allâhu profusely reward the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat for the incessant and relentless drudgery they went through for the sake of the research they carried on to find this right way. That it was only the Sunnî Muslims who fought the Khwârij, i.e. the enemies of Hadrat Alî and his progeny, is a fact which Shiites also know well. There were no Shiites, –or their number was infinitesimally small–, when the Sunnî Muslims ploughed a lonely furrow in giving the enemies of Ahl-i-Bayt their deserts. By the way, do these people call the Sunnî Muslims ‘Shiites’ on account of their love of Ahl-i-Bayt? And do they think, therefore, that those people who dispersed the Khwârij and frightened them away were Shiites? So surprising to say, sometimes they call the Sunnî Muslims ‘Khwârij’. Perhaps they really think so, since the affection which the Sunnî Muslims display towards the Ahl-i-Bayt is not aggressive and excessive. And, conversely, they sometimes consider the Sunnî Muslims as Shiites on account of the moderate love which they show towards the Ahl-i-Bayt and which is the manner of affection proper towards those great people. Consequently, and because they are vulgarly ignorant, when they hear the expression ‘love of the Ahl-i-Bayt’ from the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, they conclude that those scholars side with them. On the other hand, when other scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat warn against excessive affection and admonish that the (other) three Khalîfas must be loved, this time they call those scholars ‘Khwârij’. Shame on them for the unjust and inappropriate labels they hang on the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. Because of their anomalous affection towards Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, they say that love of Hadrat Alî necessitates animosity against the three Khalîfas and against most of the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Why should they be so unreasonable? How could that ever be called love?

Could the name of love ever allow for the folly of animosity against the Khalîfas of the Messenger of Allah or defamation of his Sahâba. The only reason for the hatred they feel against the Sunnî Muslims and for the ugly aspersions they cast on them is the Sunnî Muslims’ complementing love of the Ahl-i-Bayt with love of all the Sahâba, and their not maligning any one of the Sahâba although they know about the wars which took place among them. Because the Sunnî Muslims realize the value and honour of the sohbat of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, they state that each and every one of the Sahâba was a superior, valuable and pure Muslim who had been purged from all sorts of malice, recalcitrance and jealousy. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat do discriminate between the right and the wrong parties in those wars. Yet they state that the mistakes were based not on the wicked desires of the nafs, but on ra’y and ijtihâd. If the Sunnî Muslims also were inimical and abusive towards most of the great Sahâba, these eccentric people would be pleased with them and would no longer speak ill of them. On the other hand, the Khwârij would sympathize with the Sunnî Muslims only if they, too, were enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt. Yâ Rabbî! After showing us the right way, do not make our hearts slip away from it! Bless us also from Thine endless treasures of Compassion! Thou art the only source of goodness.

As the greatest ones of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat explain, the blessed Sahâba of our master the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ parted into three groups concerning the matters that caused the so-called wars:

1– The Sahâbîs in the first group ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ observed the events and reached the ijtihâd that those who were with Hadrat Alî were right.

3– The third group were hesitant. Their ijtihâd did not show clearly which party was right.

It was wâjib for the blessed Sahâbîs in the first group to act in accordance with their own ijtihâd and support Hadrat Alî. Likewise, it was necessary for the second group to follow their own ijtihâd and support the opposing party. And the third group was to support neither party. It would have been wrong for them to support either party. Each of the three groups acted in accordance with their own ijtihâd. All three of them did what was wâjib and necessary for them to do. Then, how could we ever blame them for having done so? And which one of them could we blame? Imâm Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ states: “Allâhu ta’âlâ has protected us from imbruing our hands with their blood. So we should protect our tongues from interfering with them.” ’Umar bin Abd-ul’azîz also is reported to have made an identical statement. That statement shows that we should not make comments on the events among them, neither favourable nor unfavourable; we should not pass judgments, for instance, on who was right and who was wrong. We should only speak in praise of them. A hadîth-i-sherîf commands us to do so. The hadîth-i-sherîf reads as follows: “Keep your tongues when my Sahâba are mentioned,” which means, “When people talk about my Sahâba and the wars among them, protect yourselves. Avoid expressing a predilection for some of them and blaming the others.” We have to obey this commandment. However, according to the understanding of most of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, the Sahâbîs who fought on Hadrat Alî’s side were right. The opposing party were erroneous. Yet they cannot be blamed, since theirs was an error of ijtihâd. An error of ijtihâd is not something open to criticism. Those (mujtahids) with erroneous ijtihâd, like the mujtahids whose ijtihâd was right, cannot be blamed or vilified. Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is reported to have made the following explanation amidst the so-called wars: “Our brothers disagree with us. They are neither disbelievers nor sinners. For, their ijtihâd is what they understand, which would not make them disbelievers or sinners.” As is seen, the Sunnîs and the Shiites concur in that the Sahâbîs who fought with Hadrat Alî were wrong, and in that Hadrat Alî was right. They differ, however, inasmuch as the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat state that the erroneous party cannot be blamed because their error originated from their understanding and points of view. They hold that we should avoid criticizing and maligning those great people and that we should be considerate of the right and honour of the Best of Mankind ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’. Indeed, our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated: “Fear Allâhu ta’âlâ lest you should fail to be considerate of my Sahâba’s rights. After me, do not speak ill of them!” He repeated the same statement twice in order to emphasize the importance of his commandment. It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “All my Sahâba are like the celestial stars. You will attain hidâyat and happiness if you follow any one of them!” There is many another hadîth-i-sherîf which commands that each and every Sahâbî must be held great and respected. Therefore, we have to hold them valuable and superior. As for the trivial mistakes ascribed to them; we should, at the most, believe that there were benevolent intentions behind those mistakes. This is the Sunnî credo.

Some people exceed the limits in this matter. They call the Sahâbîs who fought with Hadrat Alî ‘disbelievers’ and utter about them such ugly, abominable and vulgar expletives as one could not even imagine oneself articulating. Their abusive language fouls their own tongues. If their attitude is intended to show that Hadrat Alî was right and those who fought with him were wrong, they might as well be moderate like the Sunnî Muslims, which would perfectly serve their cause. This moderacy is at the same time compatible with justice and reason. There cannot be a religion or a madhhab which is based on vituperation or criticism of those great religious celebrities. These eccentric people have adopted that vicious policy as a religion for themselves. They believe that inimical and opprobrious attitude towards our Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba is an act of worship. What kind of a religion and madhhab is it that its principal credal tenet is to curse Rasûlullah’s Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în?

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Muslims will part into seventy-three groups. Seventy-two of them will go to Hell on account of their heretical beliefs. Only one group will attain salvation.” Each of the seventy-two groups deviated from the Sunnî path by inventing various bid’ats. The basest and the worst of the seventy-two heretical groups are those who have been waging an animosity campaign against the Ashâb-i-kirâm. They are the most aberrant and the farthest away from the Ahl as-Sunnat, (i.e. the Sunnî Muslims,) who are the seventy-third group, the only group whose direction leads to salvation. What foreign matter could be found in the pure name of right to associate with these miscreants, who believe that the basis of their religion and madhhab is to vituperate and curse the religious authorities? With time, this group broke into twelve sub-groups. Contentious as they are among themselves, all twelve sub-groups concur in insistently calling the Sahâba disbelievers. They say that it is an act of worship to swear at the Khulafâ ar-râshidîn. However, they avoid being called Râfidîs. They say that Râfidîs are other people. For they, too, know about the hadîth-i-sherîfs foretelling that Râfidîs will be tormented in the world to come. It would be great if they avoided the tenor as well as the vehicle of the word ‘Râfidî’ and desisted from their inimical stance towards the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Hindus in India call themselves Hindus, not disbelievers. They do not consider themselves to be disbelievers. They say that disbelievers are those who live in the Dâr-ul-harb. They are quite wrong. They are disbelievers, regardless of the country they live in. The way they follow is kufr (disbelief).

Or, do these people identify themselves with Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Ahl-i-Bayt? Do they think, in other words, that the Ahl-i-Bayt also are hostile to Abû Bakr and ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’? To think so would mean to consider the greatest ones of the Ahl-i-Bayt as hypocrites. They assert that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ dissembled his real feelings and intentions throughout his thirty-year-long friendship with the other three Khalîfas, that he suppressed his grudge against them for the sake of getting along well with them, holding them superior and showing deference to them although they did not deserve it. Their assertion is extremely appalling. If they loved the Ahl-i-Bayt because they loved Rasûlullah, they would be inimical towards Rasûlullah’s enemies and curse Rasûlullah’s enemies more bitterly than they do the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt. However, they have never been seen or heard to curse or even criticise Abû Jahl, who was Rasûlullah’s arch enemy and who hurt and persecuted him so cruelly. On the other hand, they cling to the heretical belief that Hadrat Abû Bakr, who was the most beloved companion of the Messenger of Allah, was an enemy of the Ahl-i-Bayt. In an unbridled fury, they hurl the most vulgar invectives at him. They cast on him such aspersions as would run quite counter to his great honour. What kind of a religion or madhhab is theirs? May Allah forfend! How could it ever be imagined that Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar and all the Ashâb-i-kirâm were enemies of Rasûlullah’s Ahl-i-Bayt ‘ridwânullâhi ’alaihim ajma’în’? It would be all right if these unreasonable and blasphemous people swore at the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt without mentioning the names of the greatest Sahâbîs and thereby putting themselves into the awkward position of maligning the greatest religious celebrities. If they did so, they would be no different from the Sunnî Muslims (in belief). Indeed, the Sunnî Muslims also know the enemies of the Ahl-i-Bayt as their own enemies, blame them and curse them. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat provide the following very elegant and subtle explanation on the matter: “We should not say that a certain person is to go to Hell, even if he has gone into various kinds of kufr (disbelief). He may make tawba and become a Muslim again (before death). Such people should not be cursed in name. And we should not curse a certain disbeliever by mentioning his name. Disbelievers must be cursed en masse. A dead person can be cursed only if it is known for certain that he died without îmân, (i.e. as a disbeliever).” Some of these wretched miscreants shamelessly curse Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar and malign and pronounce maledictions on the greater ones of the blessed Sahâba. May Allâhu ta’âlâ bless these wretched people with guidance to the right path and deliverance from that wrong and heretical path! Âmîn.

There are two main differences between the Ahl as-Sunnat and these people on this matter:

1– According to the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, all (the earliest) four Khalîfas were rightly-guided. Indeed, it is declared in one of the hadîth-i-sherîfs foretelling the ghayb (unknown): “After me there will be a thirty-year caliphate.” The ‘caliphate’ in the hadîth-i-sherîf is ‘caliphate in its full sense.’ The thirty-year period of caliphate ended by the end of the caliphate of Hadrat Alî. This hadîth-i-sherîf shows that all four Khalîfas became Khalîfas rightfully, and so is the case with the order of their caliphates. Some non-Sunnî people assert that the earliest three Khalîfas assumed office unjustly and by force. According to them, Hadrat Alî was the only rightly-guided Khalîfa. They say that Hadrat Alî’s tacit consent to the caliphates of his three predecessors was intended to handle the matter lest he should cause a fitna. They believe that the blessed Sahâba of our master, the Prophet, feigned friendship with one another, that they handled one another hypocritically, and that they pretended to be firendly with one another in order to get along well. According to these self-appointed supporters of the chimerical cause, the Sahâbîs who were of the opinion that Hadrat Alî should be (the first) Khalîfa had to feign being friendly with the men of the three Khalîfas and dissembled their predilections. Accordingly, the other party, in their turn, dissimulated their hostility towards Hadrat Alî under feigned endearing smiles and friendship. According to these people, all the Sahâba were double-faced liars who pretended to be of the opinion quite the opposite of what they actually thought. According to these people, the Sahâba are the worst of Muhammad’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ Ummat (Muslims), and Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ sohbat (company) is the worst of all sohbats. For, according to these wretched people’s reasoning, the Sahâba should have acquired the suppositional wicked habits from the sohbats and lectures of the Messenger of Allah, which in its turn means that they should have led a life of hypocrisy, animosity, jealousy and grudge. The fact, however, is quite the other way round; The final âyat of Fat-h sûra purports: “They are utterly compassionate towards one another.” We trust ourselves to Allâhu ta’âlâ’s protection against such heretical beliefs. If the so-called iniquities were the case with the pioneers of this Ummat, could their posterior have an iota of goodness? I wonder if these people have never heard of the âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs telling about the superb quality of Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ sohbat and the goodness of his Ummat? Or, do they deny them? It was the Ashâb-i-kirâm who conveyed the Qur’ân al-kerîm and hadîth-i-sherîfs to us. Defamation of the Ashâb-i-kirâm, therefore, means defamation of the religion they conveyed to us. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from perpetrating such abhorrent calumniations and from holding such heretical beliefs! Their allegations betray their insidious plans to annihilate Islam. They are trying to undermine Islam under the cloak of affection towards Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Ahl-i-Bayt. In the shadow of the feigned affection lurks the horrid intention to extirpate Rasûlullah’s Islam. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect Muslims from believing them! I wish they at least spared some respect for the supporters of Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ by not considering them as hypocritical people. Given the assertion that the supporters of Hadrat Alî and his adversaries dissembled their hostilities towards each other and handled each other with mendacious friendliness for thirty years, which one of them should be given a share from goodness thus left in abeyance? And which one of them should we trust? They vilify and curse Hadrat Abû Hurayra ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’. They do not realize that by defaming him they defame and discredit half of Islam’s commandments and prohibitions. Indeed, according to mujtahids, who were profound scholars, Islam’s commandments and prohibitions were extracted from three thousand hadîth-i-sherîfs. In other words, three thousand of the Islamic principles and rules were based on hadîth-i-sherîfs. Fifteen hundred of those (three thousand) hadîth-i-sherîfs were reported and quoted on the authority of Abû Hurayra. Therefore, to malign him means to cast a slur on half of the Islamic rules. As Imâm Bukhârî observes, more than eight hundred of the Islamic scholars quoted hadîth-i-sherîfs on the authority of Abû Hurayra. Most of those scholars were among the Ashâb-i-kirâm or the Tâbi’în-i-izâm. For instance, Abdullah ibn Abbâs and Abdullah ibn ’Umar and Jabir bin Abdullah and Enes bin Mâlik conveyed hadîth-i-sherîfs from Hadrat Abû Hurayra ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum’. On the other hand, these wretched people quote a statement blaming Hadrat Abû Hurayra and assert that it is a hadîth-i-sherîf reported on the authority of Hadrat Alî. It is their own fabrication. That the statement is a concoction is a bare fact divulged by profound scholars. A hadîth-i-sherîf wherein our master, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, prays for an increase in Abû Hurayra’s knowledge and intellectual capacity, is well-known among the scholars of Hadîth-i-sherîf and is written in the section captioned ‘Kitâb-ul-’ilm’ of the book Bukhârî-i-sherîf. Abû Hurayra ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ relates the event as follows: We were sitting with our master, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, when the blessed Messenger said: “Which one of you will take off his garment and lay it on the ground? I shall say some things. Then he must fold his garment up. He will never forget my utterances.” I took my coat off and laid it on the ground. The Messenger of Allah, our master, said what he wished to say. I put on my coat again and covered my chest. From then on, I never forgot whatsoever I heard. It is a rank injustice to accuse such a great religious authority as Hadrat Abû Hurayra as an enemy of Hadrat Alî and to denigrate and vituperate that blessed person on account of that false accusation. Their eccentricities must be consequent upon excessive affection. It is an excess that verges on loss of îmân. Supposing we took for granted all their allegations, agreed with their heresy, and believed that Hadrat Alî had obeyed the other three Khalîfas unwillingly and got along with them hypocriticially; then how would we explain away his widespread statements in praise of the (earliest) two Khalîfas, (i.e. Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar)? How would these people advise us concerning those statements? It is written, for instance, in all the books concerned with the matter that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was Khalîfa and the State was thoroughly in his hands when he acknowledged that the three Khalîfas previous to him had been rightly-guided and canonically legal Khalîfas. How would they interpret that state of affairs? As a matter of fact, a double-faced policy could entail, at the most, self-abnegation from caliphate although one believed that it was one’s right, or concealment of e.g. the fact that the other three Khalîfas did not deserve the office. Yet it would be quite zany to hunt for hypocrisy in the acknowledgement that the earlier three Khalîfas had been rightful and that Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar were the highest Muslims, which is merely the statement of a fact. Furthermore, there are sahîh and authentic hadîth-i-sherîfs stating the superiorities of the three Khalîfas and of many another Sahâbî, and those hadîth-i-sherîfs are universally known. Also, there are hadîth-i-sherîfs which mention the names of many Sahâbîs, giving the glad tidings that they will go to Paradise. What will they say about those hadîth-i-sherîfs? For, no justification could be found for ascribing hypocrisy to Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. Every Prophet has to state all facts exactly as they are. Moreover, what will they say about the âyat-i-kerîmas praising the Ashâb-i-kirâm? Hypocrisy in âyat-i-kerîmas is something that can never be considered. May Allâhu ta’âlâ give them reason! Every person with an average wisdom knows that hypocrisy is a wicked habit. It is treachery. It is quite unfair to attribute this iniquity to Hadrat Alî, who was the Lion of Allah. It would have been human for him to have been so for a few hours or for a couple of days; yet it is an execrable slander against the Lion of Allah to say that he lived with that iniquity for thirty years. It is stated (by the Islamic scholars) that insistence on venial sins will generate grave sins. Then, what would become of a person who spent thirty years of his life span perpetrating that iniquity, which is a sign of treachery and hypocrisy? How I wish that these wretched people realized the gravity of their libellous allegation and desisted from denying the superiority of the first two Khalîfas lest they should cause an awkward situation in the name of Hadrat Alî. If they were conscious of the wickedness of hypocrisy, which is a habit peculiar to munâfiqs, they would avoid the disastrous misstep which brings disgrace on Hadrat Alî. They would thus choose the milder one of the two disastrous situations, weathering the worse one. One more fact that needs to be emphasized at this point is that it is by no means a disastrous situation for them to believe in that the first two Khalîfas were the most superior. In other words, this belief will not belittle Hadrat Alî at all. Nor will it divest him of his right of caliphate. His right of caliphate, his very high grade in (the spiritual area called) Wilâyat, and his power in (the spiritual branches such as) hidâyat and irshâd will all remain intact. On the other hand, to say that he unwillingly pretended to be friendly towards those who expropriated his right of priority to caliphate, means to degrade and belittle the great Imâm. For, hypocrisy is a habit of munâfiqs, liars and swindlers.

2– According to the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat ‘rahimahumullâhu ta’âlâ’, the contentions and fights among the Ashâb-i-kirâm were based on benevolent thoughts and useful reasons. None of them followed his nafs or did anything for the sake of sheer resistance. In fact, the sohbat of the Messenger of Allah had thoroughly purified the nafses of all the Ashâb-i-kirâm. So pure were their hearts that they never felt any hostility, grudge or prejudice against one another. Each and every one of them had attained the grade of a mujtahid higher than all the other Islamic scholars. It is wâjib for every mujtahid to act in accordance with his own ijtihâd. Naturally, different mujtahids have different ijtihâds on some matters; in other words, they disagree with one another on what is right and correct in some matters. When their ijtihâds differ, so do their practices, since every one of them ought to act in accordance with his own ijtihâd. Hence, the attitudinal clashes among the Ashâb-i-kirâm were the fruits of their endeavours to bring truth and right to light. Their endeavours show that they agreed on the same purpose. Their differences and conflicts were not intended to satisfy the desires of the nafs-i-ammâra. Some people stigmatize those who fought with Hadrat Alî as ‘disbelievers’. They vituperate those blessed people and utter violent expletives against them. The fact, however, is that there were a few matters on which the Ashâb-i-kirâm disagreed with Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ and made statements contradictory with the conclusions drawn by the Messenger of Allah. Neither Allâhu ta’âlâ nor His Messenger castigated them for their arguments, which the events that took place in the aftermath sometimes proved to be right and correct. They were not blamed at all. Nor were they incriminated as the Wahy was revealed afterwards. Then, how can some people ever be called disbelievers on account of their ijtihâd disagreeable with Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd? How can they ever be blamed for having reached an ijtihâd contrary to Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd? Those who fought against Hadrat Alî were not only a few people whom these wretched miscreants continuously vilify. There were thousands of other Islamic authorities among them.

[According to some information presented in (the history book) Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ, the number of those who made war against Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was thirty thousand in the event of Camel, and that their number was a hundred and twenty thousand in the example of Siffîn. The number of casualties in both events amounted to forty-five thousand. As we have already detailed in the previous pages, a Jew named Abdullah bin Saba’ and his collaborators sowed discord among the Ashâb-i-kirâm and caused the martyrdom of thousands of Muslims. It is a fact written in the Qur’ân al-kerîm that Jewry is responsible also for the martyrdom of a number of prophets.]

To call the greatest ones of the blessed Sahâba ‘disbelievers’, and to use abusive language about them, is not an easy dare to take, especially if those fortunate people have been blessed with the Glad Tidings that they will go to Paradise. I wish these wretched people were aware of the perilous consequences that their foul language would lead to. It is those blessed people who conveyed nearly half of Islam’s teachings. If those people are reviled, half of the religious knowledge will lose its dependability. How can those people ever be maligned despite the fact that none of the Islamic scholars has rejected any narration reported on the authority of any one of them? Hadrat Alî also reported what he had heard from them. That the book entitled Sahîh-i-Bukhârî is the most authentic book on the earth after the Qur’ân al-kerîm is a fact which Shiites also know and acknowledge. This faqîr, –Hadrat Imâm Rabbânî means himself–, heard the following acknowledgement from Ahmad Tabtî, an eminent Shiite scholar: “After the Qur’ân al-kerîm, the truest book on the earth is the book Bukhârî.” The book contains narrations reported on the authority of those Sahâbîs who were opposed to Hadrat Alî as well as those reported on the authority of his supporters. The narrators’ being on either side did not add to or detract from the value of the narrations. The great scholar, (i.e. Imâm Muhammad bin Ismâ’îl Bukhârî,) wrote in his book those narrations reported on the authority of Hadrat Mu’âwiya as well as those reported from Hadrat Alî. If he had had any doubts as to the dependability of Hadrat Mu’âwiya or the authenticity of the hadîth-i-sherîfs he had narrated, he would not have let the narrations reported from him occupy a place in his book. Likewise, all the scholars of Hadîth borrowed narrations from both sides without any segregational considerations, since having fought with Hadrat Alî was not an offense or a fault in their view.

Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd is not necessarily always the right one in such clashes of ijtihâd; nor should it be taken for granted that those who reached an ijtihâd disagreeable with his were always wrong. It is true that Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd in the so-called wars was right. It is not a rare event that the greater ones of the Tâbi’în and leaders of our Madhhabs, whenever they had to make a choice between two antithetical ijtihâds, preferred the ijtihâd disagreeable with Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd, leaving aside Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd. If Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd had been necessarily always right, other ijtihâds disagreeable with his ijtihâd would not have been accepted. Qâdî Shurayh, an eminent scholar among the Tâbi’în, was a mujtahid. He refused to make his decision in accordance with Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd and rejected the testimony of Hadrat Alî’s son, Hadrat Hasan, saying that he would not accept a person’s testimony in favour of his own father. All the other mujtahids have followed Qâdî Shurayh’s example and rejected a person’s testimony for his father. There is many another example wherein ijtihâds counter to Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd were taken as a basis. Reasonable people who read religious books will see that what we say is quite right. Therefore we need not attempt any further exemplifications. As is seen, it is not an offence to reach an ijtihâd disagreeable with Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd or not to act in accordance with his ijtihâd. Those who do not follow his ijtihâd are not necessarily wicked or blamable people.

Hadrat Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ was Rasûlullah’s darling. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ loved her very much and held her high till his death. Rasûlullah lived in her room till his death, passed away on her lap, and was buried in her most fragrant room. Aside from being so honourable, she was a profoundly learned mujtahid. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had assigned her the task of teaching half of Islamic knowledge. Whenever the Sahâba were confused about a religious matter or had difficulty solving a religious problem, they would run to her, learn what they needed to, and be back with the solution of their problem. It is not something a Muslim would do to malign and vituperate against such an honourable Siddîqa, a virtuous mujtahid, on account of her ijtihâd contrary to Hadrat Alî’s ijtihâd. It is something which a Believer in the Messenger of Allah would shudderingly keep shy of. Whereas Hadrat Alî was Rasûlullah’s son-in-law, Hadrat Âisha was his zawja-i-mutahhara, (i.e. pure and blessed wife,) darling, and most cherished lifelong companion. A few years ago this faqîr, –Imâm Rabbânî means himself–, developed a habit of giving food to the poor every week, intending that the thawâb (next-worldly rewards for the charity) be given to the souls of the Ahl-i-abâ. In other words, I would send the blessings that I would be given for the charitable act to the soul of Rasûlullah, our master, and also to the souls of Hadrat Alî, Hadrat Fâtima, Hadrat Hasan, and Hadrat Husayn. One night I had a dream in which I made salâm to, (i.e. greeted by saying “As-salâmu ’alaikum, Yâ Rasûlallah,”) the Messenger of Allah, our master. He would not even pay attention to me. Turning his blessed looks away from me, the Best of Mankind said, reproachingly, “I would eat in Âisha’s home. Those who sent me food, would send it to Âisha’s home.” When I woke up I knew that the blessed Messenger’s inattentive attitude towards me was on account of my inattention towards Hadrat Âisha concerning the dispensation of the thawâb for charity to Rasûlullah’s blessed family. From then on I sent the thawâb for the weekly food-giving charity not only to Hadrat Âisha, too, but also to all the other zawjât-i-mutahhara ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhunna’. Indeed, all those people were members of the Ahl-i-Bayt. Thus I attained the honour of expecting help and shafâ’at from all the Ahl-i-Bayt.

To hurt Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ through Hadrat Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhâ’ is more perilous than doing so through Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’. This fact is quite palpable to wise and reasonable people.

As we have been emphasizing repeatedly, love of Hadrat Alî and the reverence to be shown to him should be based on the love and reverence we have for the Messenger of Allah. He must be loved and esteemed because he was beloved to the Messenger of Allah and on account of his kinship and in-law relationship with the Best of Mankind. If a person loves Hadrat Alî directly and holds him in high esteem without associating it with love of the Messenger of Allah, there is nothing we are to say to him. There is nothing we can discuss with that person, for he is trying to demolish the religion and to annihilate Islam. Turning away from the Messenger of Allah, he has been pursuing quite a different course. He has turned his face to Hadrat Alî instead of the Messenger of Allah, which is kufr (disbelief). Hadrat Alî does not like such people. Their words and writings hurt him. Our love of the Ashâb-i-kirâm, of the zawjât-i-tâhirât and of Rasûlullah’s in-laws is only consequent upon our love of Rasûlullah ‘alaihi wa ’alâ âlihi wa ashâbih-is-salawât’. We hold them great and respect them only for the sake of Rasûlullah ‘alaihis-salâtu wa-s-salâm’. The hadîth-i-sherîf, “He who loves them does so because he loves me,” shows that what we say is true. By the same token, hostility towards any one of them means hostility towards the Messenger of Allah. As a matter of fact, another hadîth-i-sherîf reads as follows: “He who is hostile to them is so because he is my enemy.” These two hadîth-i-sherîfs complement one another as follows: “To love my Sahâba means to love me. And enmity against them is enmity against me.”

Hadrat Talha and Hadrat Zubayr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ were among the greatest Sahâbîs. They are two of the ten fortunate people who were blessed with the Glad Tidings (that they would go to) Paradise. It is quite erroneous to malign or criticize those two beloved Sahâbîs. Any curse uttered against them or any aspersion cast on them will recoil on the source of the curse or the aspersion. Talha was one of the six people whom Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ named and said that one of them should be designated as Khalîfa after him, and Zubayr was another. Khalîfa ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ could not make a choice among the six people because he did not know which one was the most superior. The two Sahâbîs, (i.e. Talha and Zubayr,) stated their wish to be excused from candidature for caliphate. One of them, Talha, was the kind of a person who had killed his own father on account of his failure to mind his manners towards Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’. Allâhu ta’âlâ praises him for his respect for the Messenger of Allah in the Qur’ân al-kerîm. As for the latter, Zubayr; Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had stated that his killer would go to Hell. A person who curses or maligns him is not less ignominious than the person who killed him.

Avoid speaking ill of great religious leaders and maligning great Islamic celebrities! Do avoid it, indeed! And avoid it very much! Those people spent their entire lives propagating Islam and supporting Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’, who is the highest of the entire creation, and sacrificed all their property day and night and secretly and overtly for the promulgation of the religion. For love of the Messenger of Allah they abandoned their kith and kin, their children, their wives, their homes and countries, their streams, fields and trees. They preferred Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ to all these things and to their own lives. Leaving aside love of all these things and love of their own lives, they adhered to love of the Messenger of Allah. They attained the honour of talking with the Messenger of Allah and keeping him company. Owing to the barakat of his sohbat, they were blessed with the superiorities of prophethood. They saw the Wahy revealed by Allâhu ta’âlâ and attained the honour of being with the angel. They witnessed wonders and miracles beyond the laws of chemistry and physics. Things which others have only heard of were shown to them with all their clarity. They were blessed with such closenesses and superiorities as none of the later generations were given. Such were the heights they were promoted to, and so unique was the love lavished on them, that the blessings that would be given to others in return for mountains of gold dispensed in the name of alms are said, (in authentic narrations,) to hardly equal half the blessings which those most fortunate people attained by giving a handful of barley. Allâhu ta’âlâ lauds and praises them in the Qur’ân al-kerîm. He declares that He is pleased with them and that they are pleased with Allah. The final âyat of Fat-h sûra promotes them in honour. Allâhu ta’âlâ states in that âyat-i-kerîma that those who harbour a grudge against them are disbelievers. Therefore, hostility against them should be bewared from with the same alarm and trepidation as we would feel if we should lapse into kufr (disbelief).

So unprecedented was the affection which attached those blessed people to Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ and so nonpareil were the honours which they attained by enjoying his special love and attention (tawajjuh), that it is quite preposterous to malign them or to dislike them on the pretext that they fell out with one another as a result of differring ijtihâds on matters whose solutions needed ijtihâd and that every group acted in accordance with their own ijtihâd. In matters of that nature difference was more appropriate than unity, and others’ ijtihâd was not to be imitated. It would have been wrong, for instance, for Imâm Abû Yûsuf ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ to imitate the ijtihâd of Imâm a’zam Abû Hanîfa ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’, (who had educated him,) after he himself had attained the grade of ijtihâd. It was compulsory for him to act in accordance with his own ijtihâd. Imâm Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ would not hold the views and conclusions of any of the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ preferrable to his own views. He would refuse any ijtihâd that was counter to his own ijtihâd, even if it belonged to Abû Bakr as-Siddîq or Hadrat Alî. He deemed it appropriate to act in accordance with his own ijtihâd even when his ijtihâd was contradictory with their ijtihâd. Since an ordinary (non-Sahâbî) mujtahid’s disagreeing with the ijtihâds of the Sahâba is permissible and rightful, why should the Sahâba be blamed for disagreeing with one another’s ijtihâd, and how can they ever be maligned on account of their rightful practices?

The Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ sometimes had ijtihâds contrary to the ijtihâd of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. They acted in contradiction with Rasûlullah’s ijtihâd. Their contradictory ijtihâd was not reproached in the Wahy that was revealed in the aftermath. None of them was castigated at all on account of their differing in ijtihâd. They were not prohibited from having ijtihâd contradictory with Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ ijtihâd. If Allâhu ta’âlâ had not approved of the differences of ijtihâd among the Ashâb-i-kirâm, certainly He would have prohibited them from such disagreements, and the Sahâbîs with contradictory ijtihâd would have been intimidated with torment (in the world to come). We all know about the proscription of talking loud with Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ and the intimidation that those who do so will be tormented. The second âyat of Hujurât sûra purports: “Ye who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Messenger of Allah, nor speak aloud to him in talk, as ye may speak aloud to one another, ...” (49-2). It was something He did not approve of; so He prohibited it on the spot. There was a difference of ijtihâd among the Ashâb-i-kirâm concerning how to deal with the prisoners of war captured during the Holy War of Badr. Hadrat ’Umar and Hadrat Sa’d bin Mu’âdh proposed to kill the prisoners of war. Others were of the opinion that they should be set free in return for a certain amount of monetary payment. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was among those who held the latter ijtihâd. Putting the latter ijtihâd into practice, they started emancipating the captives; thereupon an âyat-i-kerîma was revealed and Hadrat ’Umar’s ijtihâd was declared to have been correct. In many another similar event there were ijtihâds at variance with one another.

[One of them is related as follows in the book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ, by Ahmed Cevdet Paşa ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’: In the sixth year of the Hegira the Messenger of Allah and fourteen hundred Sahâbîs were enroute from Medîna to Mekka for the purpose of paying a visit to the Kâ’ba-i-mu’azzama, when they received intelligence that the unbelievers were intent upon denying the Muslims’ admission into Mekka. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ called a halt at a place called Hudaybiya and said to Hadrat ’Umar: “Yâ ’Umar! Go to Mekka! Tell them that we do not mean war and that we will make a visit of the Kâ’ba and go back!” Sensing that the commandment was a result of ijtihâd, Hadrat ’Umar proposed his own ijtihâd: “Yâ Rasûlallah! The unbelievers of Qoureish know that I am their arch enemy. They will tear me to pieces if I go there alone. ’Uthmân would be a more appropriate choice for the mission. ’Uthmân has many kinsfolk there. They will protect him.” Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ wellcomed Hadrat ’Umar’s suggestion, let alone taking exception to his apparent objection. So Hadrat ’Uthmân was sent to Mekka. There is many another example showing Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ concessions to the ijtihâds of his Sahâba. He stated, for instance: “Allâhu ta’âlâ has placed the right word into ’Umar’s tongue.”]

In his final illness, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ asked for paper to write some pieces of advice for his Companions. The Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘alaihim-ur-ridwân’ did not agree on whether they should bring some paper. Some of them said they should do so, while others were of the opinion that they should not. Hadrat ’Umar-ul-Fârûq ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was among the latter group. He said, “The Book of Allah will suffice for us.” Some people attack him on account of that event. They utter the most vulgar invectives unreservedly. Indeed, they do not have the right to criticize. For, Hadrat ’Umar knew that the Wahy (revelation of the Qur’ân al-kerîm) had already come to an end, that Allâhu ta’âlâ had already completed the declaration of His commandments, and that ijtihâd was the only source for deriving new religious information. What our master, the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, wanted to do was to write what he found by way of ijtihâd at that moment. The second âyat of Hashr sûra purports: “... Take warning, then, O ye with eyes (to see)!” (59-2). This âyat-i-kerîma commands those scholars who have attained the grade of ijtihâd to do ijtihâd. All the Ashâb-i-kirâm were mujtahids. They, too, were quite capable of the skill of ijtihâd needed for the pieces of information which the blessed Prophet meant to write at that moment. Another motive which induced Hadrat ’Umar’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ apparently negative attitude was his anxiety not to let our Prophet “sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ bother himself with that toil at a time when his agonies were already on the increase. Because he loved the Messenger of Allah very much, he said that the Book of Allah would suffice for them, lest they should tire the Messenger of Allah for something whose solution would be possible with the Sahâba’s ijtihâd. He meant to say that the Qur’ân al-kerîm was a source sufficient for them to derive the needed information by way of ijtihâd, since information based on ijtihâd is derived by mujtahids from the Qur’ân al-kerîm. It can be inferred from his literal expression, “The Book of Allah will suffice for us,” that he must have sensed that the pieces of information that the Honour of the Entire Creation intended to write were in the category derived from the Qur’ân al-kerîm and not from hadîth-i-sherîfs. Hence, the extremely profound affection and the utterly self-sacrificial compassion which Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ felt for Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ deterred him from acceding to the bringing of paper, for it would have entailed an additional exertion for the Best of Mankind to attempt the business of writing at the most troublesome and painful moments of his final illness. As a matter of fact, Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ momentary wish to write something emanated from the exquisitely profuse feeling of compassion inherent in his blessed nature which always prompted him to do favours for his Sahâba and to be useful for them. What he was going to write was not one of Islam’s essential teachings. His purpose was to save his Sahâba from the toil of ijtihâd. If the commandment, “Bring me paper,” had been a definite one, he would have repeated his commandment, making sure that his wishes be written. The difference of ijtihâd among his Sahâba would not have made him revoke his order.

Question: Hadrat ’Umar also said, “I wonder if he is talking subconsciously (because of fever)? Try and find out if it is so.” What does that mean?

Answer: Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ may have considered that the Messenger of Allah was unconscious of what he was saying due to the pangs of illness. As a matter of fact, the Prophet’s saying, “I will write,” contributes to that probability. Indeed, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was ummî (illiterate). He had not been seen to write a single word. Another factor which occasioned Hadrat ’Umar’s considering that likelihood was the Prophet’s completing his order with the causative clause, “... lest you should deviate from the right path after me.” For, Allâhu ta’âlâ had already declared that the teaching of Islam had been completed, that His blessings had culminated in perfection, and that He had been pleased with that state of affairs. How could deviation from the right path have been likely despite the consummate circumstances, and how could a brief piece of writing have been expected to protect a community from degeneration to which they are considered so prone? How could an aberration which an entire book written in twenty-three years is supposed to have fallen short of preventing have been prevented with a paragraph scribbled in haste amidst the increasing pains of illness? Realizing all these considerations and reasonings in a moment, Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ saw that the Prophet’s order, “Bring me paper,” was a human mistake which inadvertently slipped out of his blessed mouth. In order to be sure, he suggested to ask the Prophet again. When the talks became somewhat louder, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ warned: “Stand up! Do not make noise! It is not nice to make noise in the presence of the Prophet.” He did not say anything else. Nor did he repeat asking for a pen (and paper).

If the Sahâba’s disagreeing with Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ in matters requiring ijtihâd had resulted from the sensuous recalcitrance of the nafs or from lack of respect, they would have become renegades –may Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us from such a disaster! They would have gone out of Islam. For any disrespectful or quarrelsome behaviour towards Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ is kufr (disbelief). Their disagreements were consequent upon their obedience to the commandment in the second âyat of Hashr sûra. Indeed, it is not right for a person who has attained the grade of ijtihâd to leave aside his own ijtihâd and act in accordance with someone else’s ijtihâd in matters dependent on ijtihâd. Islam forbids to do so. It is true, however, that ijtihâd is not permissible in matters which are declared clearly in the Qur’ân al-kerîm or in hadîth-i-sherîfs. Everybody has to obey those overt commandments. It is wâjib to believe them and not to disagree with them.

None of the Ashâb-i-kirâm was fond of ostentation or judged by appearance. What they all were interested in was purification of the heart. They looked at the inner essence and meaning and were always mindful of (the Islamic manners called) adab. They would never adhere to superficialities or words. Their primary concern was to obey Rasûlullah’s commandments and to avoid the mildest peccadilloes that might have hurt the Messenger of Allah. They would and did sacrifice their parents, their children and their families for the Messenger of Allah. So strong was the belief they held in him, so sincere and genuine was the adherence that attached them to him, so heartfelt was the affection that they felt towards him, and so profound was the respect for him by which their entire existence was pervaded, that his blessed spittle was never seen to reach the ground (before being caught by one of those most faithful admirers); nor were his nails clipped or hair cut. They would compete with one another to seize at least one small sample of those blessed pieces disposed of from his luminous body, and to keep it as the most valuable, blessed and fruitful souvenir. If a statement made by one of those pure people and explored recently should contain an expression that can be interpreted as an irreverence towards the Messenger of Allah in today’s world of lies and deceits with which even the areas of meanings and semantics have been contaminated, the expression must be given a benevolent meaning and good meanings conveyed by the entire statement must be taken into consideration, rather than the semantic distortions that every individual word should have gone through in process of time.

Question: Inasmuch as mistakes are said to be likely in religious teachings obtained by way of ijtihâd, can all the religious information provided by Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ be said to be correct?

Answer: When the religious teachings which were found by way of ijtihâd in the time of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ were inconsistent with one another, the correct one would be revealed by Allâhu ta’âlâ. For it was not permissible for prophets to do something wrong. When there were contradictory ijtihâds concerning a certain matter, Allâhu ta’âlâ would declare which one was correct, and thus the correct one would be distinguished from the incorrect ones. When various differring ijtihâds were reached on a certain matter in the time of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, the angel in charge would descend with the wahy revealing the correct answer. Thus the correct ijtihâd would be acted in accordance with and what was done thereupon would be right and correct. Hence, every fact taught by Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was certainly true and everything he did was definitely correct. A slightest mistake in his teachings was quite out of the question. In fact, whereas the direct and overt religious teachings are correct because they were revealed by the angel in charge, the religious teachings inferred by way of ijtihâd are equally correct since they were verified by the revelation realized through the angel. Some matters were left to scholars’ ijtihâd instead of being revealed directly and clearly; this divine policy should have been applied as a kindness to scholars and so that they would attain the blessings created in the nature of ijtihâd. The religious teachings which were inferred by way of ijtihâd caused mujtahids to be promoted to higher grades. Not so is the case with the ijtihâds done after Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ passing away; religious teachings found by way of those ijtihâds are not guaranteed. They cannot be said to be definitely correct teachings. Therefore, it is not compulsory to believe that they are correct, although it is permissible to act in accordance with them. It is not kufr (disbelief) to deny their correctness. However, if the ijtihâds reached by all mujtahids indicate identical results, which is called ijmâ’ (consensus, unanimity), it is compulsory to believe in the correctness of the teachings found by such unanimous ijtihâds.

We will beautify the conclusive part of our letter by writing the superiorities of the Ahl-i-Bayt ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’:

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf quoted on the authority of Yûsuf bin Abdulberr: “He who loves Alî will have loved me (by doing so). He who is inimical towards Alî will have been inimical towards me (by being so). He who hurts Alî will have hurt me. And he who hurts me will have hurt Allâhu ta’âlâ.”

[Some people exploit this hadîth-i-sherîf as an attestation to stigmatize those who fought Hadrat Alî as disbelievers. The fact, however, was that the parties who fought each other were not inimical towards each other. Their hearts were not angry with each other although they hurt each other physically. Amidst the fights Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ called the other party “Our brothers”. And Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ wrote, “My master,” about Hadrat Alî. It is written as follows in the hundred and forty-ninth (149) page of the seventh chapter of the 1331-Istanbul edition of the book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ: When Hadrat Hasan ceded the caliphate (to Hadrat Mu’âwiya), which the greater ones of the Sahâba such as Sa’d bin Abî Waqqâs accepted, the government of Hadrat Mu’âwiya was canonically lawful. Hadrat Mu’âwiya seized the power by the use of force although he was one of the Sahâba. Yet the time and the circumstances had made it inevitable. People were acting in defiance of the Khalîfa’s authority. Force and power were necessary, which meant the commencement of the era of sovereignty. Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was rightful and eligible for the position. As is seen, even the book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ, which these exploiters rely on as a basis for their argument, writes that Hadrat Mu’âwiya was one of the Sahâba and attaches the phrase of blessing ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ to his name. The following account is given in its hundred and fifty-first (151) page: Things had taken a turn for the worse and the administration of the Muslims’ matters and businesses required the use of force and power now. And Hadrat Mu’âwiya was considered eligible for the responsibility. Whereas formerly the Khalîfa’s orders had been sufficient for the execution of Islamic principles, a sovereign power was necessary from then on. Since the main objective was the maintenance of Islam, all the Sahâba present at that time paid homage to Mu’âwiya ‘ridwânullâhi ’alaihim ajma’în’. It is written as follows in its hundred and fifty-seventh (157) page: Hadrat Mu’âwiya was a Sahâbî and had been honoured with Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ laudatory remarks. He was among the notables of Qoureish. On account of his exceptional competence with which he successfully enforced Islam, he was called the ‘Khalîfa-i-Rasûlullah’.]

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Tirmuzî and Hâkim ‘rahimahumullah’: “Allâhu ta’âlâ has given me the names of four people He loves. He commands that I should love all four of them. They are Alî, Abû Zer, Mikdâd, and Salmân.”

A hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Tabarânî, by Hâkim and by Abdullah ibn Mes’ûd quotes Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ as having stated: “It is an act of worship to look at Alî.” According to a hadîth-i-sherîf which (the books) Bukhârî and Muslim report on the authority of Hadrat Berâ, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ lifted Hadrat Hasan, placed him on his blessed shoulder, and invoked: “Yâ Rabbî! I love this one. (I beg Thee that) Thou, too, love him!”

According to a hadîth-i-sherîf which Bukhârî reports on the authority of Hadrat Abû Bakr, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ mounted the minbar with Hadrat Hasan ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ in his arms. He was turning his blessed looks now to us, then to Hasan. He stated, “This son of mine is a Sayyid. Owing to him Allâhu ta’âlâ will conciliate between two armies of Muslims.”

According to another hadîth-i-sherîf, which Tirmuzî reports on the authority of Usâma bin Zayd, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had had Hasan and Husayn on his lap, each sitting on one of his blessed knees. He stated: “These two are my sons, and they are my daughter’s sons. Yâ Rabbî! I love these two. (I beg of Thee that) Thou, too, shouldst love them, and love also those who love them!”

According to a hadîth-i-sherîf which Tirmuzî reports on the authority of Enes bin Mâlik, when Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was asked which one(s) of the Ahl-i-Bayt ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ he loved most, “Hasan and Husayn,” was his answer.

A hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Musawwir bin Muharram reads as follows: “Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ is a part from me. He who hurts her will have hurt me.”

A hadîth-i-sherîf which Hâkim reports on the authority of Abû Hurayra reads as follows: “I love Fâtima more than (I love) Alî, and Alî is more valuable than Fâtima to me.”

Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ relates: The Sahâba would bring their presents (to the Messenger of Allah) whenever he was in my home. They would try to win his love by doing so. According to another report which Hadrat Âisha, again, reports, the blessed wives of the Messenger of Allah had parted into two groups. I was in the first group with Hafsa and Safiyya and Sawda. The other blessed wives, with Umm-i-Salama in the lead, made the other group. Sending Umm-i-Salama as their spokeswoman to the Messenger, the other group voiced their wish that he should order the Sahâba, “When any one of you wishes to give me a present, let him bring it to that home of mine where I happen to be at the moment.” When Umm-i-Salama conveyed the wish, the Best of Mankind stated: “Do not hurt me! The angel brings me wahy (chapters of the Qur’ân al-kerîm) only when I am in Âisha’s home.” Upon this, Umm-i-Salama said, “Yâ Rasûlallah (O You, Messenger of Allah)! I trust myself to Allah to protect me from hurting you. Never again!” The same group of blessed wives repeated their attempt, delegating Hadrat Fâtima this time. “O my beloved daughter! Will you not love someone whom I love,” asked the Honour of Creation. When Fâtima ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhâ’ replied, “Yes, I will,” the blessed Prophet concluded: “Then, love her!”

Âisha ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhâ’ relates: I envied no other wife of the Messenger of Allah as strongly as I did Khadîja ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhâ’, although I had never seen her. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ would mention her name very frequently. Whenever he killed a sheep, he would send some of the meat as a present to Khadîja’s kinsfolk. When he mentioned Khadîja’s name, I would say, “Is Khadîja the only woman in the world?” Thereupon the blessed Prophet would praise her, saying, “She was so good, and so forth. I had children from her.”

A hadîth-i-sherîf reported on the authority of Abdullah ibn Abbâs reads: “Abbâs is from me. And I am from him.”

It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf which Daylamî reports on the authority of Abû Sa’îd: “Allâhu ta’âlâ will inflict very bitter torment on those who hurt me by traducing my progeny and descendants.”

A hadîth-i-sherîf which Hâkim reports on the authority of Abû Hurayra ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ reads as follows: “The best one(s) among you is (are) the one(s) who will do kindness to my Ahl-i-Bayt after me.”

Ibn Asâkir quotes the following hadîth-i-sherîf on the authority of Hadrat Alî: “If a person hurts my Ahl-i-Bayt, the torment he will suffer on account of it on the Last Day will be enough for him.”

Ibn Adî and Daylamî quote the following hadîth-i-sherîf on the authority of Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’: “A person who loves my Ahl-i-Bayt and my Sahâba very much will pass the bridge of Sirât most easily.”

[This is the end of the translation of Imâm Rabbânî’s ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ letter.]

The great scholar Sayyid Abdulhakîm Arwâsî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ provides the following explanations in his booklet entitled Ashâb-i-kirâm (‘Sahâba the Blessed’): Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Ahl-i-Bayt fall into three groups. One of the groups consists of his kinsfolk, i.e. those related to him by blood. His paternal aunts are in this group. His blessed and pure wives make the second group. In the third group are those female servants who always stayed with his blessed wives and served them by combing their hair, cooking for them, cleaning their rooms, doing the laundry and other housework. Bilâl, Salmân and Suhayb, who were responsible for outdoor services such as calling the adhân (azân), were among the people who ate and drank in the blessed home (of the Prophet). Hadrat Fâtima and all her children till the end of the world are also among the Ahl-i-Bayt. It is necessary to love them even if they are disobedient Muslims. To love them, to serve them with one’s heart, body and property, and to behave respectfully towards them will cause one to die with îmân, (i.e. as a Believer). There used to be a court of justice allocated for Sayyids in the Syrian city of Hamâ. During the reigns of the Abbasid Khalîfas in Egypt Hadrat Hasan’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ descendants were called Sherîfs and Hadrat Husayn’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ descendants were called Sayyids, and a decree was enacted that the former should wear a white turban and the latter should wear a green turban. Children born from both blessed families would be registered in the presence of a judge and two witnesses. In the time of Sultân Abdulmejîd Khân ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ the law courts were abrogated by the masonic vizier Reshîd Pâsha. People without a known genealogy and without a certain Madhhab began to be called Sayyids. Sham Persian Sayyids spread far and wide. It is stated as follows in the book Fatâw-al-hadîthiyya: “During the Sadr-i-awwal, all the members of the Ahl-i-Bayt were called Sherîfs. For instance, expressions like ‘Sherîf-i-Abbâsî’ and Sherîf-i-Zaynalî were being used. The Fâtimî sultans were in the Shiite sect. They called only the descendants of Hasan and Husayn ‘Sayyids’. Eshref Sha’bân bin Husayn, one of the Turcoman sultans in Egypt, decreed in 773 [1371 A.D.] that the Sayyids wear a green turban so that they be distinguished from the Sherîfs. These regularizations, far-flung as they soon became, were of customary nature and had no canonical significance.” Detailed information in this respect is available from the book Mir’ât-i-kâinât, as well as from the Turkish version of Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya or from the third chapter of the seventh part of its revision rendered by Zerkânî.

ADDITION: Some non-Sunnî impostors have been trying to mislead the Muslims in our country (Turkey). Baffled in their attempts to find at least some clues in the books written by Islamic scholars that they can distort into documentary evidence and adduce as grounds for their vilification of Hadrat Mu’âwiya and the other Sahâbîs who fought Hadrat Alî, they repair to a lower level of falsification by magnifying the tragic stories which the Abbasid historians concocted with considerations such as adulation, worldly gains and positional furtherance. Also, changing the writings in the Turkish book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ, they try to use them as false evidence for their treacherous cause. For the purpose of divulging the slanders and lies which these traitors employ in their strategy to sow discord among the Muslims in our country and to set brothers against one another, we deem it relevant to borrow some excerpts from the book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ and bring them to our dear readers’ attention:

It is written as follows in the hundred and seventh (107) page of the book Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ: “Hadrat Hasan ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ had entered into a series of short-lived marriages. The girls he had married would fall in love with him even sooner than the end of the fleeting marriages. Hadrat Hasan’s last wife, Ja’da, apprehensive that he would divorce her, too, poisoned him.” As is seen, Hadrat Hasan was poisoned by his wife because of jealousy. Contrary to the allegations of those lâ madhhabî people, Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ had no knowledge, let alone a part, concerning the felony.

The hundred and ninety-third (193) page contains the following observation: “Hadrat Mu’âwiya became ill in the sixtieth year of the Hijrat. He sent for his son Yazîd and gave him a long sermon of advice. The gist of the admonitory part of his advice was: Inhabitants of Kûfa may provoke Hadrat Husayn to march against you. If you are victorious over him, forgive him! Be kind towards him! He is very close to us. He has great rights over us, and he is Rasûlullah’s grandson.” These words of Mu’âwiya’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ are a most clear indication of the affection and respect he felt towards the Ahl-i-Bayt.

When Hadrat Mu’âwiya’s illness became heavier, he stated: “Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ put a shirt on me. I have kept it ever since in order to be blessed with its barakat. One day I put pieces cut off from his blessed nails and hair into a bottle, which, also, I have kept up until now. When I am dead, put the shirt on me, and place the nail-clippings and the pieces of hair on my eyes and on my mouth. Perhaps Jenâb-i-Haqq will forgive me for the sake of them.”

The following account is given in its hundred and ninety-fourth (194) page: Hadrat Mu’âwiya was tall, white-complexioned, stately, extremely patient, and sweet-tempered. His soft demanour was proverbial. One day a man entered his presence and insulted him in an unbearably rude manner. Hadrat Mu’âwiya was silent. When the other people in his presence asked if he would never run out of patience, he said, “We will not react to people’s insults unless they mean harm to our sultanate.”

According to a short passage in its hundred and ninety-fifth (195) page, Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ warned: “Do not malign Mu’âwiya’s administration! Indeed, if you lose him you will see heads being cut off and falling down.”

The following information is given in the book Mir’ât-i-kâinât: Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ and his father Abû Sufyân embraced Islam in the presence of Rasûlullah on the day when Mekka was conquered. They had firm îmân. Hadrat Mu’âwiya was one of Rasûlullah’s secretaries. Rasûlullah asked a blessing over him several times, invoking, “Yâ Rabbî! Keep this person in the right path and make him a means for other people’s guidance to the right path!” And once the blessed Prophet invoked this blessing over him: “Yâ Rabbî! Teach Mu’âwiya knowledge and calculation! Protect him from torment! Yâ Rabbî! Make him dominant over countries!” And at another time he gave him this advice: “O Mu’âwiya! Do kindness when you dominate over countries!” Afterwards Hadrat Mu’âwiya said that he had been awaiting the day when he would become Khalîfa since he had heard the blessed Prophet’s invocation. One day Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was riding a beast of burden with Hadrat Mu’âwiya sitting behind him, when the Best of Mankind asked, “Yâ Mu’âwiya! What part of your body is closer to me?” When the latter replied that his abdomen was closer, Rasûlullah invoked: “Yâ Rabbî! Fill this with knowledge and with mild temper!” So richly gifted was Hadrat Mu’âwiya with forgiveness and clemency that a book of two huge volumes was written in praise of him. Four great geniuses have been raised in Arabia. Mu’âwiya is the first one of them. Whenever Hadrat ’Umar looked at Mu’âwiya he would say, “Among the Arabian rulers, this person is the one as majestic and as powerful as Persian sovereigns.” So great was his magnanimity that he gave Hadrat Hasan eighty thousand gold coins when the latter said he was badly in debt. [The event is a clear indication of his special sympathy for the Ahl-i-Bayt and the services he rendered to them.]

Hadrat ’Umar was the first conqueror of the city of Jerusalem, and Hadrat Mu’âwiya was the second. Hadrat Mu’âwiya enlarged the Islamic lands to Tunis in Africa, to Bukhâra in Asia, and from Yemen to Istanbul, establishing full control over these vast countries. He was a stately, luminous-faced, handsome, good-tempered, congenial, right-minded, respectable and honourable state president. Always in clean, new, tidy and smart apparel, and fond of riding choice horses, he led a life of great splendor. However, owing to the barakat inherent in Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ sohbat, –since he was one of the Sahâba–, he had been immunized against aberration from Islam.

According to a narration reported in the four hundred and seventeenth (417) page of the book Madârij-un-nubuwwa, written in the Fârisî language by Hadrat Abdulhaqq Dahlawî, and also in the hundred and eighty-first (181) page of the first volume of the Turkish version of Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya, Abû Sufyân bin Harb displayed great heroism in the Holy War of Tâif. One of his eyes went out of its socket. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “Yâ Abâ Sufyân! Make a choice! If you wish, I will pray for you and your eye will be replaced. Otherwise, Allâhu ta’âlâ will give you an eye in Paradise, if you prefer this second choice.” Abû Sufyân replied, “Yâ Rasûlallah! I prefer that I be given an eye in Paradise,” dumping the eye which he was holding on his palm onto the ground. Hadrat Abû Sufyân performed many acts of heroism in the Holy War of Yermûk, too, where he lost his second eye. He attained martyrdom in the same event.

The following account is given in the three hundred and fourteenth (314) page of Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ: After the conquest of Mekka, Abû Sufyân and his son Mu’âwiya joined the Messenger of Allah and migrated to Medîna. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allahu ’alaihi wa sallam’ appointed Abû Sufyân as governor of Najrân, and made Hadrat Mu’âwiya a scribe of wahy.

It is written as follows in the four hundred and seventy-sixth (476) page of Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ: Three thousand Muslims attained martyrdom in the Holy War of Yermûk. There were many blessed Sahâbîs among them. Abû Sufyân became totally blind when an arrow hit his second eye ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum ajma’în’.

According to information provided in the six hundred and eighty-fourth (684) page of the second volume of the book Medârij-un-nubuwwa, by Abdulhaqq Dahlawî, Yazîd bin abî Sufyân, governor of Damascus, designated his brother Mu’âwiya as his successor upon the approach of his own death. Hadrat ’Umar, the time’s Khalîfa, ratified Hadrat Mu’âwiya’s governorship. He retained his position as governor of Damascus for the next four years, i.e. until the death of Hadrat ’Umar, and the following sixteen years, i.e. throughout the caliphates of Hadrat ’Uthmân, Hadrat Alî, and Hadrat Hasan. In the forty-first year of the Hegira, when Hadrat Hasan ceded the caliphate, he became Khalîfa rightfully. By the end of his twentieth year in the office of caliphate, he passed away of facial paralysis at the age of seventy-eight. He was one of those who held the opinion that the murderers who had martyred Hadrat ’Uthmân should be arrested and punished immediately. Hadrat Alî, by contrast, considered that a hasty approach towards their punishment could aggravate the already turbulent matters of caliphate. Upon this he dismissed Hadrat Mu’âwiya from governorship. A hadîth-i-sherîf which Imâm Suyûtî quotes from Imâm Ahmad’s book of Musnad reads: “Yâ Rabbî! Teach Mu’âwiya how to write and how to calculate, and protect him from torment!”

The facts which we have written so far bespeak the oddity of the course followed by those people who vilify Rasûlullah’s two Sahâbîs, Abû Sufyân and his son Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’, over whom valuable Islamic books such as Qisâs-i-Anbiyâ say the blessing, ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, and praisingly state that they tried to serve Islam till they took their last breath.

Miracles bestowed on Ahmed[83] were beyond calculation in numbers,
Three thousand of them did the Sahâbâ tally at one time.

Miracles are proofs for a person’s prophethood,
Like the sun’s heralding every new daytime.

Once seen, a miracle will suffice for confirmation,
Muhammad himself was with infinite miracles a paradigm.

For his trueness Qur’ân alone would suffice, no doubt,
Peerless, indeed, it is, in its belles-lettres and in rhyme.

So much so, none was able to imitate, genies and humans alike,
“It really is Word of Allah,” all had to admit in rhyme.

The Turkish history book Mir’ât-i-kâinât, which is a compilation of a number of books and was prepared by Muhammad bin Ahmad Efendi, who is also known with the sobriquet ‘Nişancızâde’, provides a concise and explicit account of the greatness of the Sahâba and the superior merits each of them was gifted with. The following is an English translation of the passages borrowed from that book. Nişancızâde (Muhammad bin Ahmad Efendi) was born in the hijrî year 962, and passed away in 1031 [1622 A.D.]. He completed his book in the time of Sultân Ahmad Khân I, the fourteenth Ottoman Pâdishâh.

Who is called a Sahâbî: According to a great majority of scholars, once a male or female Muslim has seen Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ only for a short time, no matter whether he/she is a child or an adult, he/she is called a Sahâbî with the proviso of dying with îmân (as a Believer); the same rule applies to blind Muslims who have talked with the blessed Prophet at least once. If a disbeliever sees the Prophet and then joins the Believers after the demise of the Messenger of Allah, he is not a Sahâbî; nor is a person called a Sahâbî if he deserted Islam afterwards although he had seen the blessed Prophet as a Muslim. A person who deserts Islam after having attained the honour of being a Sahâbî and then becomes a Believer again after the demise of the Messenger of Allah, is a Sahâbî. Since Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was a Prophet for genies as well, a jinnî also can be a Sahâbî. Sahâbîs in the mass are called Ashâb-i-kirâm or Sahâba.

Superiorities of the Ashâb-i-kirâm: According to information given in the book Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya, the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘alaihim-ur-ridwân’, after prophets, and after the angels occupying special higher positions, are the highest community of the entire creation. Each and every Sahâbî is higher than all the rest of this Ummat (Muslims). All the people who believe in the prophethood of Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’, i.e. all Muslims, regardless of their races and nationalities and the countries they live in, are the Ummat of Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’. We, Muslims, are the Ummat of Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’. Despite the hadîth-i-sherîf which states, “My Ummat are auspicious like rain. It cannot be known which Muslims are more auspicious, the earlier ones, or the later ones,” advantageous positions attained on account of the amount of thawâb earned are not indications of superiority. Indeed, no other superiority can equal a superiority gained by having seen Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. When the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ conquered Damascus, the Damascene Christians observed their graceful manners and attitudes with profound admiration and swore that the new comers were superior to the Hawârîs, i.e. the Apostles of Îsâ (Jesus) ‘alaihis-salâm’. Who on earth could ever argue against a superiority witnessed (and acknowledged) even by the enemy? The hundred and tenth âyat of Âl-i-’Imrân sûra purports: “Ye are the best of Ummats, ...” And the hundredth âyat of Tawba sûra purports: “The vanguard (of Islam) –The first of those who forsook (their homes) and of those who gave them aid, and (also) those who follow them in all good deeds,– Well-pleased is Allâhu ta’âlâ with them, as they are with Him: For them hath He prepared Gardens under which rivers flow, to dwell therein for ever: That is the supreme Felicity.”

It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Do not vituperate against my Sahâba! If a Muslim belonging to the generations that will come after my Sahâba dispenses a mountain of gold in the name of alms, he will not attain thawâb half as much as the thawâb which one of my Sahâba would attain by giving a handful of barley.” A hadîth-i-sherîf quoted by Munâwî and Bayhakî reads as follows: “My Sahâba are like the stars in the sky. If you follow any one of them you will attain hidâyat.” It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “Avoid being hostile towards my Sahâba! Fear Allah. He who loves them does so because he loves me. He who is hostile to them is so because he is my enemy. He who hurts them will have hurt me. And to hurt me certainly means to hurt Allâhu ta’âlâ.” It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “The best of peoples are the Muslims who live in my time. Those who see them are the next best after them. And the third best people are those who see the people who have seen them. There will also be people not good at all among the generations that will come after them.” Another hadîth-i-sherîf reads as follows: “Muslims contemporary with me are the best among my Ummat. The next best people are those who will come after them. And those who will come after them are the third best.” It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf, which is quoted by Munâwî and Tirmuzî: “The fire of Hell will not burn a Muslim who has seen me or one who has seen a Muslim who has seen me.” These âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs clearly state the superiority of the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’.

We must hold all the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ in high esteem and love them all. As is unanimously stated in books of aqâid (credal matters), “It is necessary to know all the Ashâb-i-kirâm as great and superior people, to have a good opinion of them, and to believe that they were true and pious Muslims. We should not criticize or curse any one of them; we should never feel inimical towards any one of them; and we should avoid the ambivalence of loving some of them while feeling animosity against other Sahâbîs. We should avoid the absurd expectation that we will have loved some of them by being inimical towards others or by maligning or cursing them. The facts we have stated have been corroborated by definitely authentic documents and substantiated proofs.

It is not sinful to feel more sympathy for a certain Sahâbî, on account of his worldly accomplishments, than for another Sahâbî who you know is higher, although you believe certainly that the latter is higher. For instance, if one of the descendants of Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’, e.g. a Sayyid, loves Hadrat Alî, his ancestor, more than he loves Hadrat Abû Bakr although he holds Hadrat Abû Bakr in higher esteem than Hadrat Alî in matters pertaining to the Hereafter, he is not sinful for his emotional predilection. For, worldly sympathy is not something within a person’s will.

Sa’duddîn Teftâzânî makes the following explanation in Sharh-i-Aqâid, one of the basic books of the Ahl as-Sunnat: “We have to believe in the fact that the differences and wars among the Sahâba were based on benevolent reasons. It is not permissible to curse or blame any one of the Ashâb-i-kirâm. And it is kufr to malign a Sahâbî who is praised in the Nass (âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs with clear meanings); Hadrat Âisha is one of the Sahâbîs in that category. If a Sahâbî is not individually praised in the Nass, it is an act of heresy and a grave sin to malign him.” It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf written in the book Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya: “Hold your tongue when my Sahâba are mentioned! Do not say something that may be blasphemy against their honour!” It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “If a person vituperates against one of my Sahâba, beat him!” Another hadîth-i-sherîf, quoted by Tabarânî and Munâwî, reads as follows: “A person who curses a prophet is to be killed, and a person who curses my Sahâba is to be beaten.” It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf quoted in the book Jâmi’us-saghîr, by Hadrat Jelâladdîn Suyûtî: “My Sahâba will have faults and mistakes. Allâhu ta’âlâ will forgive them their faults.” It is stated in the book Khulâsat-ul-fatâwâ: “It is an act of disbelief to curse Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar. Yet it is heresy and aberration, not disbelief, to believe that Hadrat Alî was higher than they were.” When Hadrat Imâm a’zam Abû Hanîfe was asked what the Madhhab of Ahl as-Sunnat wa’l-jamâ’at was, he replied: “It is to believe in the superiority of Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar, to love the two sons-in-law of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, to make masah on the two mests on your feet, during the performance of ablution,[84] and to perform namâz behind any Muslim, regardless of whether he is good or bad.” According to information given in the book Âdâb-ul-menâzil, it is not an act of disbelief to curse a certain Sahâbî only once; it is an act of aberration. A person who commits the act of cursing once or twice or three times is chastised with flogging. He who commits the act more than three times is to be killed.

Scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat group the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ in three categories in respect of superiority.

1– Muhâjirîn (Migrators): Those who left their homes and countries, in Mekka or elsewhere, and migrated to Medîna, before the conquest of Mekka. Those people embraced Islam either before or after joining Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ (in Medîna). Hadrat ’Amr ibn al-’Âs was one of them.

2– Ansâr (Helpers, Supporters): Muslims who lived in the city of Medîna or in places near the blessed city, as well as those who belonged to the two tribes called Aws and Hazraj, are called Ansâr ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’. Indeed, those people promised all sorts of help and sacrifice for the sake of our master Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, and they did keep their promises.

3– The other Sahâbîs ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’: They are the people who became Believers upon the conquest of Mekka or afterwards in Mekka or elsewhere. They are not called Muhâjirîn or Ansâr. They are only called Sahâbîs. According to an observation in the book entitled Jâmi’, by ibn Esîr Izzaddîn Alî Jazrî, the Muhâjirîn are higher than the Ansâr, the earlier ones of the Muhâjirîn are higher than those Ansâr who embraced Islam later, the earlier ones of the Ansâr are higher than the later ones of the Muhâjirîn, and yet there is many a later Sahâbî higher than many another Sahâbî who embraced Islam earlier. For instance, Hadrat ’Umar and Bilâl Habashî are higher than a number of other Sahâbîs who joined the Believers earlier. Imâm Suyûtî states as follows in the book entitled Târîh-ul-Khulafâ: As is unanimously stated by scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, the (earliest) four Khalîfas of the Messenger of Allah are the highest ones of the Ashâb-i-kirâm. The next highest Sahâbîs are the remaining six of the ten fortunate people who were blessed with the Glad Tidings of Paradise, and also Hadrat Hasan and Hadrat Husayn. The highest Sahâbîs next after them are the three hundred and thirteen (313) Sahâbîs who, together with these twelve (highest) Sahâbîs, joined the Holy War of Badr. The next highest Sahâbîs are the seven hundred (700) heroes who fought in the Holy War of Uhud. The next highest Sahâbîs are the fourteen hundred (1400) people who promised the Messenger of Allah, under a tree, saying, “We will rather die than go back,” in the sixth year of the Hijrat. The well-known covenant is called Bî’at ur-Ridwân.

It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf quoted in the book of tafsîr entitled Bahr-ul-’ulûm: “Abû Bakr is the most compassionate Muslim in this Ummat. ’Umar has the rigidest religious perseverance. ’Uthmân has the most hayâ (sense of shame). Alî is the one who answers every question in the Sharî’at. Mu’âdh is the one who is most knowledgeable in halâls and harâms. Abiyy bin Kâ’b is the best reader (or reciter) of the Qur’ân al-kerîm. Huzayfa-t-ibn Yemân is the one who recognizes the hypocrites. He who wants to see Îsâ’s ‘alaihis-salâm’ zuhd should look at the zuhd Abû Zer has! Paradise is in love with Salmân-i-Fârisî. Khâlid bin Walîd is the sword of Allah. Hamza is the lion of Allah. Hasan and Husayn are the highest ones of the young people of Paradise. Ja’far bin Abî Tâlib will be flying with the angels in Paradise. Bilâl will be the first to open the gate of Paradise. Suhayb-i-Rûmî will be the first to drink from my pond Kawthar. On the Rising Day, Abû-d-Derdâ will be the first person with whom angels will shake hands. Every prophet has a friend. Sa’d bin Mu’âdh is my friend. There are people whom every prophet chooses from among his Ummat. Talha and Zubayr are the ones I have chosen. Every prophet has an assistant who performs his private chores. Enes bin Mâlik is my assistant. There are hakîms in every Ummat. Abû Hurayra is the one of my Ummat who utters the most hikmat. Hassân bin Thâbit’s speech has been endowed with a powerful effect by Allah. The voice of Abû Talha in the battlefield is stronger than that of a division of soldiers.” Alâuddîn Alî Samarkandî, the author of the book Bahr-ul-’ulûm, passed away in the Anatolian city Lârende in the year 860.

Hadrat Imâm Suyûtî quotes the following hadîth-i-sherîf in the book Târîh-ul-Khulafâ (History of the Khalîfas): “Abû Bakr is the most compassionate one of my Ummat. ’Umar is the most austere one in performing the commandments of Allâhu ta’âlâ. ’Uthmân has the most hayâ (sense of shame). Alî is the best in solving the difficulties in the Sharî’at. Abû ’Ubayda bin Jerrâh is the most trustworthy one of my Ummat. Abû Zer is the most zâhid[85] one of my Ummat. Abû-d-Derdâ is the one with the most acts of worship. Mu’âwiya bin Abî Sufyân is the most clement and the most generous one of my Ummat.”

Rasûlullah’s governors: The following information is provided in the book Hamis, which was written in 940 by Qâdî Husayn of Diyar-i-Bakr: Bâzân, who had been appointed governor of Yemen by the Persian Shâh Husraw, joined the Believers. The Rasûl (Messenger) ‘alaihis-salâm’ let him retain his position. Hence, Bâzân was the first Muslim governor. The Rasûl ‘alaihis-salâm’ appointed Khâlid bin Sa’îd to the city of San’a (in Yemen); Ziyâd bin Esed to the city of Hadremût; Abû Mûsa-l-Esh’ârî to the city of Aden; Abû Sufyân bin Harb to the province of Nejrân; Yazîd, who was Mu’âwiya’s elder brother, to the city of Teymâ; Attâb bin Esyed to the city of Mekka; and ’Amr bin ’Âs to the city of Ammân, (in Jordan). Qâdî Husayn bin Muhammad passed away in Mekka in 960.

Rasûlullah’s secretaries: Hadrat Abû Bakr; ’Umar; ’Uthmân; Alî; Talha; Zubayr; Sa’d bin Abî Waqqâs; Muhammad bin Salama; Erqam bin Abî Erqam; Abdullah bin Erqam; Mughîra bin Shu’ba; Abiyy bin Kâ’b; Zayd bin Thâbit; Abû Sufyân bin Harb, and also his son Mu’âwiya, and also Mu’âwiya’s elder brother Yazîd bin Abî-s-Sufyân; Khâlid bin Walîd; ’Amr ibn ’Âs; and Huzayfa bin Yemân were a few of them. He had other secretaries as well. Their total number is forty-three. Zayd bin Abî-th-Thâbit and Mu’âwiya bin Abî-s-Sufyân were the longest in office ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’.

He sent abroad fourteen diplomatic agents. Hadrat ’Amr bin ’Âs was one of them. The blessed Messenger sent him as an ambassador to Ammân, afterwards appointing him governor of Ammân.

The book Istî’âb consists of two thousand and seven hundred and seventy biographies of male Sahâbîs and three hundred and eighty-one biographies of female Sahâbîs. Hâfidh Yusûf bin Muhammad bin Qurtubî, the author of the book entitled Istî’âb fî ma’rifat-il-Ashâb, passed away in 463 [1071 A.D.]. According to an observation in the book entitled Mawâhib-i-ladunniyya, an untold number of people had already embraced Islam by the time Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ passed away. There were ten thousand Sahâbîs by the time Mekka was conquered, seventy thousand Sahâbîs during the Holy War of Tabuk, and ninety thousand during the blessed Messenger’s Farewell Hajj. The earth enjoyed carrying on its shoulders more than one hundred and twenty thousand living Sahâbîs by the time the Sultân of Creation honoured the Hereafter with his blessed presence.

With the exception of a few of Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ kinsfolk, all the Ashâb-i-kirâm of the Messenger of Allah ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ were junior to him in age.

According to information which the book entitled Fawâyikh-i-Miskiyya presents on the authority of Imâm Wâqidî, the following blessed Sahâbîs outlived all the others:

Abdullah bin Abî Awfâ ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ passed away in the city of Kûfa in the eighty-sixth year of the Hegira.

Abdullah bin Yesr passed away in Damascus in the eighty-eighth year (of the Hegira).

Sahl bin Sa’d ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ passed away in Medîna in the ninety-first year of the Hegira, when he was a hundred years old.

Abû-t-tufayl Âmir bin Wâsila passed away in Mekka in the hundredth year of the Hegira.

The blessed Messenger never told anyone clearly who was to succeed him as Khalîfa. By appointing Hadrat Abû Bakr as imâm (to conduct the prayers of namâz in jamâ’at) for his place eight days before his demise, he implied Hadrat Abû Bakr’s future caliphate. It was a considerably long time before Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ became ill, when one day he stayed home instead of going out to the mosque (to conduct the namâz in jamâ’at), sending his blessed Sahâba the message that he wished them to perform the namâz (without him as their imâm). Because Hadrat Abû Bakr was absent, Hadrat ’Umar assumed the duty as imâm. When the blessed Messenger heard Hadrat ’Umar’s voice, he stated: “No. No. Allâhu ta’âlâ and Muslims approve of Abû Bakr. Let Abû Bakr conduct namâz!” At another time he said to Hadrat Alî: “I asked of Allâhu ta’âlâ three times that you be the highest of my Sahâba. Allâhu ta’âlâ approved that Abû Bakr be the highest.” On various occasions Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ implied that after him Hadrat Abû Bakr would be (the first) Khalîfa. For instance, during the construction of (the mosque called) Mesjîd-i-sherîf after the blessed migration to Medîna, the Best of Mankind placed a stone for the foundation with his blessed hand and said to Hadrat Abû Bakr to get a stone and place it next to his. Then he asked Hadrat ’Umar to put another stone next to Hadrat Abû Bakr’s stone. Then he ordered Hadrat ’Uthmân to put another stone near the one which Hadrat ’Umar had placed. When Hadrat ’Uthmân put his stone next to Hadrat ’Umar’s stone, the blessed Prophet stated, “These people are my Khalîfas after me.” It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf quoted in Imâm Ahmad’s Musnad and in Munâwî’s book Kunûz-ud-deqâiq: “After me, pay homage to these two people: Abû Bakr and ’Umar.” One day a woman came with a request. The blessed Messenger told her to come back later. When the woman asked him what she was to do in case she did not find him there when she came back, the Prophet said: “If you cannot find me go to Abû Bakr! He is my Khalîfa after me.” Towards his demise he ordered: “Fetch me some paper and a pen! I shall write something for Abû Bakr.” Then he stated: “Allâhu ta’âlâ and Muslims are pleased with Abû Bakr.” Allâma ibn-ul-Hemmâm provides the following explanation in his book entitled Musâyara: Allâhu ta’âlâ had imparted to His blessed Messenger ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ that Hadrat Abû Bakr would be (the first) Khalîfa. Yet He had not ordered him to tell his Ummat (Muslims) about it.

Hadrat Abû Bakr was born two years and a couple of months after the Messenger of Allah. His father’s name was Abû Quhâfa ’Uthmân. His ancestral chain converges with that of the Messenger of Allah on the seventh father backwards. Formerly, his name was Abdulkâ’ba. The blessed Messenger ‘alaihis-salâm’ changed it to ‘Abdullah’. ‘Abû Bakr’ means ‘Bakr’s father’. He did not have a son named Bakr. However, it was customary in Arabia to prefix the surname (‘Abû’, which means) ‘Father of a son’ to a male baby’s name so that he should have a son (when he grew up). Therefore his father had named him Abû Bakr. He was also called Atîq, which means ‘emancipated (man)’, on account of the various hadîth-i-sherîfs containing the Glad Tidings that he had been emancipated from Hell. Another sobriquet he had had the honour of being called was Siddîq, which Allâhu ta’âlâ had conferred on him upon his instant affirmation of Rasûlullah’s (ascent to heaven called) Mi’râj. He was a white-complexioned, luminous-faced and slim person. Even before embracing Islam, he was among the eminent, notable, distinguished and authoritative disbelievers of Qoureish. It was in those days of nescience yet when he was renowned for his exceptional chastity, dignity and integrity. Nor had he ever tasted wine or recited poetry. He was one of the prominent and wealthiest merchants of Mekka. He had an intrinsic disposition to goodness and a singular taste of charity. Long before the advent of Islam, he and the Messenger of Allah had shared the sincere and compassionate feelings of an intimate friendship in their early youth. So heartfelt and so pure was the affection that the two adolescents had had for each other. Many a soothsayer and religious scholar he had met during his trade expeditions would tell him that a latest-time Prophet would come and that he would be one of his Sahâbîs. As soon as the Messenger of Allah called him to Islam, he became a Believer willingly. His mother Umm-ul-khayr was one of the earliest Believers. However, his father ’Uthmân was very old when he embraced Islam upon the conquest of Mekka. Abû Bakr was the only Sahâbî whose parents, children and grandchildren, all of them, embraced Islam; there was none else.

In Mekka, during the Hegira, in Medîna, in all the Holy Wars as well as in peace-time, he would never leave the Messenger of Allah alone. He was Rasûlullah’s faithful companion, confident, and counsellor in all matters. The hadîth-i-sherîf, “Allâhu ta’âlâ has supported me with four viziers. Two of them are angels. Their names are Jebrâ’îl and Mikâil. And two of them are human. Their names are Abû Bakr and ’Umar,” indicates his high honour. The Ashâb-i-kirâm would make a ring around the Messenger of Allah when they sat in his presence. The blessed Messenger would have Abû Bakr seated on his right-hand side, with ’Umar seated on the Prophet’s left. He would never let anyone occupy a seat prior to that of Abû Bakr or take his seat in his absence. His seat would be vacant when he was absent. In moral and habitual aesthetics, in valour, in generosity, in knowledge, in intelligence, and particularly in taqwâ (fear of Allah, abstinence from His prohibitions), he was superior par excellence to all the other Sahâbîs. “Abû Bakr is the bravest of us all,” was Hadrat Alî’s acknowledgement. When the Messenger of Allah passed away, most of the Arabian peasants abandoned Islam and lapsed into apostasy. When Hadrat Abû Bakr became Khalîfa, he ordered to make war against the renegades. The Sahâba asked how they could make war against entire Arabia. Upon this he drew his sword and proceeded. And so did the Sahâba, behind him. The sûra of Wa-l-layl was revealed to praise him. The blessed Messenger’s statement, “Abû Bakr’s property has been of such great benefit as no one else’s has been to me,” is written in Imâm Ahmad’s Musnad as well as in Munâwî. He dispensed all his earnings from trade for the sake of the Messenger of Allah.

Whenever a canonical question arose during his caliphate, he would look up the Qur’ân al-kerîm and the hadîth-i-sherîfs he knew for an answer. When he could not find an answer, he would ask the Sahâba. If they could not find a hadîth-i-sherîf by which to solve the question, they would continue their research, trying to reach a consensus in the last resort and adapting their practices to the result of the consensus. In case they did not reach a consensus, he (Hadrat Abû Bakr) would solve the matter with his own ijtihâd. As for Hadrat ’Umar’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ policy during his caliphate; whenever he did not find an answer for a certain question after the first stage of his research which he would normally do by minutely scanning the Qur’ân al-kerîm and hadîth-i-sherîfs, he would search for an ijtihâd which Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ might have employed for the solution of the question. Otherwise, he would employ his own ijtihâd.

He had remarkably great intelligence. When, one day, the beloved Prophet ‘alaihis-salâm’ stated, “Allâhu ta’âlâ has told a slave of His to make a choice between the world and the Hereafter. The slave said he would prefer the blessings closer to his Rabb (Allâhu ta’âlâ),” he immediately inferred that Rasûlullah’s demise was imminent, and wept bitterly. That unbelievable comprehensive speed displayed by Hadrat Abû Bakr aroused great admiration among the Sahâba. Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had stated: “The imâm should be one with the best knowledge of the Qur’ân al-kerîm.” When the blessed Prophet ordered Hadrat Abû Bakr to take his place and conduct the prayers of namâz as the imâm of the jamâ’at, that prophetic instruction connoted, incidentally, the implication that Hadrat Abû Bakr was the best of all the Sahâba in knowledge of the Qur’ân al-kerîm. He was at the same time the best-informed Sahâbî concerning hadîth-i-sherîfs and Rasûlullah’s âdâb (beautiful manners which Islam commends highly and which the Prophet himself exemplified best). Whenever the Sahâba had difficulty solving a certain canonical problem, they would ask him and he would solve the problem. The reason for the relatively low number of the hadîth-i-sherîfs which have been conveyed to us on his authority was his rather short life after the Messenger of Allah, and that limited period he spent grappling with renegades and rebels. Another area wherein he was best among the Sahâba was interpretation of dreams. According to ibn Shîrîn, who was one of the notables of the Tâbi’în and renowned for the accuracy of his dream interpretations, “With the exception of the Messenger of Allah, Abû Bakr is the most superior in interpreting dreams.” In genealogy of the Arabian tribes, especially in fixing the names of the Qoureish ancestry, he had no rival. The best was he also in foresight, in accurate guesswork, and in circumspection. In secular matters, the Messenger of Allah would always consult with him. A hadîth-i-sherîf reads: “Jebrâ’îl said to me: Allâhu ta’âlâ commands that you should consult with Abû Bakr.” The injunction, “Consult with them in your activities,” in the hundred and fifty-ninth âyat of ’Imrân sûra was revealed to order consultation with Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar. Hadrat Abû Bakr was one of the few Sahâbîs who learned the entire Qur’ân al-kerîm by heart.

There are a number of âyat-i-kerîmas and myriads of hadîth-i-sherîfs stating that Hadrat Abû Bakr was the highest of mankind, with the exception of prophets. A few of them are:

The phrase, “... No more than one companion: They two were in the Cave, ...” in the fortieth âyat of Tawba sûra, praises Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’. It is unanimously stated (by Islamic scholars) that the fifth âyat of Wa-l-layl sûra indicates the high honour of Hadrat Abû Bakr. Also, the seventeenth âyat of the same sûra was revealed for the sake of Abû Bakr. Another âyat-i kerîma which is said to have been revealed for Hadrat Abû Bakr is the two hundred and seventy-fourth (274) âyat of Baqara sûra. As a matter of fact, he gave ten thousand coins of gold secretly at night and ten thousand openly during the day in order to attain the various blessings inherent in giving alms. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Daylamî and written in Munâwî: “Abû Bakr is the best and the highest of all mankind. Only, He is not a prophet.” Another hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Daylamî and written in Munâwî reads: “Abû Bakr’s title is Atîq among the creatures of heaven. It is Atîq on the earth as well.”

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf reported on the authority of Abû Nu’aym ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ and written in Munâwî: “Abû Bakr is a person whom Allâhu ta’âlâ has freed from fire.”

Another hadîth-i-sherîf states: “Except for prophets, the sun has not risen over a person higher than Abû Bakr.”

It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “No other person has been so useful as Abû Bakr to me, both in terms of sohbat and in property. If I were to have a friend other than my Rabb, (i.e. Allâhu ta’âlâ,) I would have Abû Bakr as a friend.”

Another hadîth-i-sherîf reads: “Of all my Ummat, Abû Bakr will be the first to enter Paradise.”

It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Daylamî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ and written in Munâwî: “It is wâjib (incumbent) upon all my Ummat to love Abû Bakr and to pay gratitude to him.”

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf reported by Khatîb-i-Baghdâdî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ and written in Munâwî: “On the Judgement Day, everybody shall be judged. Only Abû Bakr shall not be judged.”

When, one day, the Messenger of Allah stated, “There are three hundred and sixty beautiful moral habits. Allâhu ta’âlâ will give one of those beautiful moral habits to one of His slaves, if He wishes to do so. Then He will let him go into Paradise on account of that beautiful moral habit,” Hadrat Abû Bakr asked, “Yâ Rasûlallah! Do I have one of those beautiful moral habits?” “Yes. You have all those moral habits,” was the blessed Prophet’s reply.

One day, the âyat-i-kerîma, “O you the nafs who is mutmainna!...” was recited completely. Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ asked: “Yâ Rasûlallah! What a beautiful thing that is!” Upon this the Best of Mankind gave the Glad Tidings: “As you die, the angel will say so to you.”

One day Hadrat Abû Bakr was offended by one of the Sahâba. When the blessed Messenger ‘alaihis-salâm’ heard about that, he convened the Ashâb-i-kirâm and admonished them: “Allâhu ta’âlâ sent me as His Messenger to you. You would not believe me. Abû Bakr was the only one to believe me. He supported me both with his property and with his life. For my sake, do not hurt this friend of yours!” From that day on, no one ever said or did anything to hurt Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’.

It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “I asked Jebrâ’îl ‘alaihis-salâm’ about ’Umar’s superior merits. Jebrâ’îl said to me: If I were to list ’Umar’s high merits for a period of time as long as the prophethood of Nûh (Noah) ‘alaihis-salâm’, (i.e. nine hundred and fifty years,) I would not be through with them (at the end of that long period). However, all the goodnesses which ’Umar possesses would amount to equal only one of the goodnesses of Abû Bakr.”

When Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ was asked to name the person he loved most, he uttered the name “Âisha.” When he was asked to name the man he loved most, he said: “Âisha’s father.” And when he was asked who was the man he loved second most, he replied: “’Umar bin Khattâb.”

One day the blessed Prophet pointed to Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar and said: “These two are the highest of the people of Paradise, with the exception of prophets.”

One day, with Abû Bakr on the Prophet’s right-hand side and ’Umar on his left ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’, and the Prophet holding their hands with his blessed hands, they entered the mesjîd-i-sherîf (the blessed mosque), and the blessed Prophet said: “On the Rising Day, we, three of us, shall arrive like this.”

One day, upon seeing Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar, the Best of Mankind stated: “These two are identical with my sight and hearing.”

One day he said to those two blessed people: “May hamd (praise and gratitude) be to Allâhu ta’âlâ, who has supported me with you two!”

In another hadîth-i-sherîf, he said to the two people: “I will not disagree with you on anything whereon you two agree.”

He stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf which is reported by Daylamî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ and written in Munâwî: “Every prophet has a halîl (sincere friend). And my halîl is Abû Bakr.”

It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “Among every prophet’s Ummat there are people very dearly beloved to the prophet. Abû Bakr and ’Umar are my choice.” ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’.

The blessed Messenger stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “As I ask of my Ummat (to say and believe in the meaning of) the phrase ‘Lâ ilâhe il-l-Allah’, likewise, I ask of them to love Abû Bakr and ’Umar.” ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’.

In another hadîth-i-sherîf, which is reported by ibn ’Âbidîn ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ and written in Munâwî, the Honour of Creation stated: “It is îmân (belief, Islamic faith) to love Abû Bakr and ’Umar. And enmity against them is kufr (unbelief).” On account of this hadîth-i-sherîf, all the Islamic scholars agree on that it is kufr to anathemize Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar or to bear hostility against them; they (the Islamic scholars) invoke Allâhu ta’âlâ’s condemnation on Shiites on account of their inimical attitude towards the two most blessed Sahâbîs.

It is stated in another hadîth-i-sherîf: “If the îmân of Abû Bakr were to be weighed against the total sum of the îmâns of all other people, Abû Bakr’s îmân would prove to be heavier.” ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’.

Hadrat Alî acknowledges: “I have found Abû Bakr ahead of me in all the areas of goodness in which I have endeavoured to be the best.” He, again, acknowledges: “After the Messenger of Allah, Abû Bakr and ’Umar are the most auspicious of all people. Love of me and animosity against Abû Bakr and ’Umar cannot coexist in a Believer’s heart.” Whenever Hadrat Alî made a khutba he would invoke: “Yâ Rabbî! Rectify our manners (so that we may attain Thine approval), as Thou hast done with the Khulafâ-ir-râshidîn!” When he was asked who were the people he meant by ‘Khulafâ-ir-râshidîn’, he said, “They are Abû Bakr and ’Umar, whom I love very much.”

Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ would always say: “Abû Bakr is our sayyid (master).” One day he said: “I wish I were one of the hairs on Abû Bakr’s chest!” On another occasion he said: “I wish to see Abû Bakr every moment in Paradise.” Another acknowledgement from Hadrat ’Umar: “I have failed in all my emulations with Abû Bakr in all sorts of goodness.”

Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was called ‘Eywâh’ on account of his great clemency and compassion.

Whenever (the angel) Jebrâ’îl ‘alaihis-salâm’ talked with the Messenger of Allah, Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was the only Sahâbî to hear the angel’s voice.

The great scholar Bedreddîn Mahmûd bin Ahmad Aynî provides the following information in his book Zayn-ul-mejâlis: Hadrat Abû Bakr as-Siddîq ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ held a pebble in his blessed mouth for twelve years lest he should say something which Allâhu ta’âlâ would dislike, as the saying went: “The worst disaster will come via one’s own tongue.” He would take the pebble out whenever he meant to say something compatible with the Sharî’at and with the Islamic manners (adab). He would fast in summertime, and not in winter. So great was his fear of Allâhu ta’âlâ that one day he saw a bird and said to it: “O you, bird! How lucky for you! You eat fruit and perch in the shades of leaves. You will not be called to account on Judgement Day. I wish Abû Bakr were a bird like you!” At another time he said, “I wish I were green grass, so that animals would eat me and I would not be recreated and called to account on Judgement Day!”

When Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ passed away, the Ansâr came together and proposed a two-caliph system, one from among them and one from among the Muhâjirîn. Upon hearing about their proposal, Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ made for the scene, taking Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ along. He quoted the hadîth-i-sherîf, “Khalîfas are from the tribe of Qoureish,” to the Ansâr. And Hadrat ’Umar added: “O you Ansâr! Have you forgotten that the Messenger of Allah designated Hadrat Abû Bakr as imâm (for his place)? Which one of you could claim to be higher than Abû Bakr?” The Ansâr replied with one accord: “We consign ourselves to Allâhu ta’âlâ to protect us from professing superiority to Abû Bakr.” They unanimously voted Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ Khalîfa. Hadrat Alî and Hadrat Zubayr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ were not present. The following day the two blessed Sahâbîs joined the others in the mosque, and thus Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was elected Khalîfa by a unanimous vote of all the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’. According to books of Tafsîr (exegesis of the Qur’ân al-kerîm), the injunction which purports, “Tell the ones of the Arabs who turn away from thee ...,” in Tawba sûra, implies that Hadrat Abû Bakr’s caliphate was rightly-guided. Indeed, it is an established fact that, after the revelation of this âyat-i-kerîma, calling Muslims to Holy War against the Pagans was after Hadrat Abû Bakr’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ calling to Holy War against renegades. The âyat-i-kerîma purports: “If you obey him Allâhu ta’âlâ will reward you with thawâb.” If Hadrat Abû Bakr’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ caliphate had been unjust, obedience to him would not have been blessed with a promise of thawâb (rewards in the Hereafter).

According to an observation in the book entitled Mawrid-il-letâfa, by Amîr Jemâleddîn Yûsuf Zâhirî, of all people, three persons were called ‘Khalîfa’ by Allâhu ta’âlâ: Âdam ‘alaihis-salâm’; Dâwûd (David) ‘alaihis-salâm’; and Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’.

Hadrat Abû Bakr appointed Hadrat ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ hâkim (judge) and Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ secretary. Abû Ubayda ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was Chief of the Police Office. He wore Rasûlullah’s ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ silver ring on his finger. He did not give up trade after becoming Khalîfa. The Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ would not approve of his continuing with the business of trade, and thereupon he was entitled to receive a stipend, which consisted of half a sheep daily; an annual income of twenty-five hundred (2500) silver aqchas; and two sets of clothing, one in summer and one for winter months.

This is the end of the part we have borrowed from the book entitled Mir’ât-i-kâinât.

Allâhumma innî a’ûdhu-bika min ’azâb-il-qabri min ’azâb-in-nâr;
Wa min fitna-t-il-mahyâ wa-l-memâti wa min fitna-t-il-Mesîh-id-dejjâl.

Most Islamic scholars have written about the greatness and superiority of Hadrat Mu’âwiya in their books, corroborating their writings with quotations of âyat-i-kerîmas and hadîth-i-sherîfs. The chapter captioned ‘The Earliest Fitna in Islam’ in this book and also the book entitled ‘Documents of the Right Word’ enlarge on their writings and the documents they have forwarded. We have deemed it appropriate to write a few more lines in the following passage, which is a translation from the book entitled ‘Tat-hîr-ul-jenân wa-l-lisân’, by Hadrat ibn Hajar-i-Makkî. The second edition of the book was printed in Egypt in 1385 [1965 A.D.]. It is stated as follows in its fifth page:

Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was an accumulation of various honours, e.g. the honour of Islam; the honour of being one of the Sahâba; the honour of belonging to the tribe of Qoureish, which is an honour specially commended in hadîth-i-sherîfs; and the honour of being related by way of marriage to Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. So high an honour is the last one, i.e. the honour of being one of Rasûlullah’s relatives, that it has been stated that people with that honour of relationship will be with the Messenger of Allah in Paradise. If any Muslim possesses any one of the superiorities we have cited presently, it is incumbent on us to love him. Hence, it takes only average wisdom and reason to realize the magnitude of love that should be spared for a person who was in possession of the total sum of all these honours.

The disagreements and fights among the Ashâb-i-kirâm did not emanate from discord among them. For instance, Khâlid ibn Walîd and Sa’d ibn Abî Waqqâs ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ disagreed with each other on a certain matter. Someone began to speak ill of Khâlid bin Walîd in the presence of Sa’d bin Abî Waqqâs. He (Sa’d bin Abî Waqqâs) presently stopped the person, saying, “Do not talk behind his back! The disagreement between us will not ruin our brotherhood in Islam.” Likewise, one day Hadrat Alî met Zubayr bin Awwâm in the street. The two blessed Sahâbîs had a somewhat harsh tiff on a certain matter in which Hadrat ’Uthmân also was involved. Abdullah, Zubayr’s son, became indignant with Hadrat Alî and began to curse him, when his father, furious at the boy’s interference, gave him a beating.

It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “The torment which my Ummat (Muslims) deserve will be inflicted in the world.” That means to say that the tumults and problems among Muslims in the world cause them to get rid of their sins. As is indicated by this hadîth-i-sherîf as well as by many another similar one, the wars among the Ashâb-i-kirâm were only temporal clashes, which added to the blessings to be given to them in Paradise. Each and every one of the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’ would try to please Allâhu ta’âlâ and to win His love in everything they did, clinging to whatsoever they thought was a commandment of Allâhu ta’âlâ. According to a unanimous statement of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat ‘rahimahumullâhu ta’âlâ’, committing a grave sin will not cause a Muslim to become a disbeliever. Then, it is by no means something canonically sanctionable to stigmatize those Sahâbîs who fought Hadrat Alî as disbelievers, to vituperate against them or to criticize them ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’.

As is stated in the Sahîh (authentic book of hadîth-i-sherîfs) entitled Muslim, which is one of the two most valuable basic books of Muslims, and also in other books, Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was a secretary of the Messenger of Allah. He would write in his presence. Zayd bin Thâbit ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ would write the Wahy. Mu’âwiya would write both the Wahy and the letters (of the Messenger of Allah).

Abdullah ibn Mubârak ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ’ observes: “The dust that entered the nostrils of the horse which Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ rode as he accompanied Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’, is a thousand times as valuable as ’Umar bin ’Abdul’azîz.” The superiority of Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ can be inferred clearly from this statement. The following hadîth-i-sherîf would suffice to tell about the greatness of Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’: As Tirmuzî ‘rahimahullâhu ta’âlâ reports, Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ made the following invocation: “Yâ Rabbî! Make him hâdî and muhdî!” It means: “O my Allah! Guide him to the right path and make him a guide leading (others) to the right path!”

Allâhu ta’âlâ likes good people. A person who tries to win the love of Allâhu ta’âlâ is called a sâlih (pious, devoted) person, or a good person. A person who has won the love of Allâhu ta’âlâ is called a Walî, (pl. Awliyâ). A Walî who guides others to goodness is called a murshîd. Being a good person requires being good towards Allâhu ta’âlâ, being good towards our master, the Prophet, and being good towards all people. A person who does not fulfil these three conditions for goodness cannot be said to be a good person. To be good towards Allâhu ta’âlâ means to believe that He exists and is one and that He is the creator and maker of all. He, alone, wills and creates everything done by every person, by every living being, by every lifeless being, and by every source of power. To be good towards Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’ means to have îmân in him, i.e. to believe that he is the Prophet of Allâhu ta’âlâ, that he is the highest of all prophets and other human beings, and that all his utterances are from Allâhu ta’âlâ, and to adapt oneself to him, i.e. to follow him. His utterances are termed hadîth-i-sherîf. To believe in him and to follow him, it is necessary to learn his words, manners and deeds, as well as the things he classifies as good and those which he says are bad. In other words, it requires ’ilm (knowledge).

Pieces of knowledge which a Muslim has to learn are called Islamic teachings. There are two groups of Islamic teachings: Religious teachings, and scientific teachings. Religious teachings fall into two categories: Physical teachings, and teachings pertaining to heart and îmân (belief, faith). Physical teachings guide people about things that are good and necessary to do, [which are called farz, or fard,] and those which are bad and therefore forbidden to do, [which are termed harâm.] The religious teachings were communicated by Muhammad ‘alaihis-salâm’. They are called Islam. Physical teachings are termed Ahkâm-i-ilâhiyya (Divine rules), or teachings of the Sharî’at. Scholars who learn Islam correctly and teach it to others and write it (in their books), are called scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. Scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat have acquired their knowledge from the Qur’ân al-kerîm and from hadîth-i-sherîfs, and they have never interpolated Islam’s teachings with their personal views. There are scholars who have inserted their own thoughts into Islam’s teachings; they are called ahl-i-bid’at, or religious reformers, or heretics. Scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat are murshids (guides) who have attained the grade of ijtihâd in knowledge. They are also familiar with the scientific teachings of their time.

A person who attends the sohbat of a Murshid-i-kâmil, i.e. who attends his company and lessons, will not only learn the Sharî’at but also attain the nûrs (lights, haloes) emanating from his blessed heart. The nûrs so spread are called fayz. The sun, in addition to its visible rays which we always see, spreads rays beyond and below the visible spectrum, such as the ultraviolet and infra-red rays, respectively. There are other invisible rays, such as laser beams, roentgen rays (x-rays), cathode rays, and death-rays, and sources that generate each of these rays. Likewise, there are invisible rays continuously emanating from Rasûlullah’s blessed heart. These rays are called nûr. These rays flowed into the hearts of the Ashâb-i-kirâm, i.e. those Muslims who were in his company, each receiving an amount in proportion to his capacity. A person’s capacity (to receive these blessed rays) is dependent upon his success in keeping within the limits drawn by the Sharî’at. Each of the Ashâb-i-kirâm was a scholar of Ahl as-Sunnat. As the nûrs and fayz reached the hearts of the Sahâba, each Sahâbî received an amount proportionate to the firmness of his belief in the Messenger of Allah and the strength of the affection he felt towards him. Because Hadrat Abû Bakr’s îmân was the firmest and his love was the strongest, he received the most fayz. Loving someone necessitates loving his lovers, hating those who hurt him, and following and serving him. Man’s heart has a special fluorescent property. It absorbs the nûrs coming and then emits them. The nûrs emitted by the hearts of the Ashâb-i-kirâm entered the hearts of the loving ones of the Tâbi’în. By way of a sort of relay conveyance, the loving hearts of each century both acquired the teachings of the Sharî’at and received fayz from their murshids.

If a person’s heart gets attached to his murshid’s heart and thereby attains the nûrs coming from the Messenger of Allah, his îmân will become firmer, and it will be easier and more pleasurable for him to adapt himself to the Sharî’at, his nafs gradually ceasing from its evil and sinful aspirations. Preoccupied as his mind may be in temporal interests and deliberations such as trade, agriculture, making a living (in a canonically legitimate way which is) called halâl; in science, arts, laws, jihâd and astronomy; and busy as he may be solving others’ problems, his heart will keep clear of all these worldly cares. He will perform all his acts of worship, carry on all his daily occupations and do all his goodnesses only for the purpose of doing the commandments of Allâhu ta’âlâ. He will not expect any other benefit. Pieces of knowledge from the world of souls will flow into his heart. Sayyid Abdulhakîm Arwâsî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ was one such person. He was ready for all sorts of questions in the teachings of îmân and fiqh as well as in all the branches of business and science, and the answers he gave would arouse great wonder and admiration in the audience. Religious and scientific knowledge acquired through a mental process of studying and learning is called ’ilm. The knowledge which flows into a murshid’s heart is called shuhûd or ahwâl, (which is plural of hâl). The shuhûd of Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Attributes is called ma’rifat. To acquire a ma’rifat of Allâhu ta’âlâ means to realize that He, alone, exists, that creatures are non-existent, and that they exists only in appearance like visions in a mirror. This two-staged ma’rifat is termed ma’rifatullah, or fanâ-fillâh. A person who has attained it is called ’ârif. A person who is ’ârif cannot harm anyone. He does favours to all people. He becomes a beloved slave of Allâhu ta’âlâ, a murshid. He spreads both the teachings of the Sharî’at and fayz. The teachings which he spreads are not called murshid. The person who spreads the teachings is called a murshid. In other words, murshid means a perfect human being, a mature Muslim who is useful to everybody, to his country and nation. To receive fayz from a murshid it is essential to know and obey the Sharî’at. For instance, a woman who wishes to obey the Sharî’at mustn’t expose her head and hair, her arms and legs in the presence of men who are nâ-mahram to her[86]; therefore, as she goes out; she has to cover all her body except her face and palms. Fayz will not come to a person who does not obey the Sharî’at. On the contrary, that he will suffer fire of Hell in case he does not make tawba, has been said (by Islamic scholars). The heart’s receiving the fayz coming to it requires realizing and believing the perfection of the murshid and loving him on account of his perfection. If a person is possessed of that love, he will receive fayz as he reads the murshid’s books as well. Also, once a person has attained the murshid’s fayz, by listening to him or by reading his books, he will receive fayz by establishing remote râbita with the murshid, i.e. by visualizing the mursihd’s blessed face, regardless of the distance between them. Also, fayz can be received from past murshids by visiting their graves.

He who observes the Awliyâ with physical eyes,
Is without sight, dead, lifeless, and inert.

The Awliyâ are alive, so they’ll be seen with eyes alive;
For, living ones will be to life alert.

The (English translation of the) eightieth letter in the first volume (of Maktûbât), by Imâm Rabbânî mujaddid-i-alf-i-thânî:

This letter, written to Mirzâ Fathullah Hakîm, explains that, of the seventy-three groups of Muslims, the group of Ahl as-Sunnat are the only Muslims who will attain salvation (from Hell):

May Allâhu ta’âlâ bless you with the fortune of walking along the path of Sharî’at-i Mustafâwiyya ‘alâ sâhibissalâtu wassalâm’! Persian line in English:

A hadîth foretells that Muslims will fragment into seventy-three groups. Each of these seventy-three groups claims to obey the Sharî’at. Each group says that it is the one that will be saved from Hell. It is declared in the fifty-third âyat of Mu’minûn Sûra and in the thirty-second âyat of Rûm Sûra: “... Each party rejoices in that which is with itself.” However, among these various groups, the sign, the symptom of the one that will be saved is given by our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ as follows: “Those who are in this group are those who follow the way which I and my Sahâba follow.” After mentioning himself, the owner of the Sharî’at did not need to mention the Sahâba ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’; yet his mentioning them may come to mean: “My way is the way which my Sahâba follow. The way to salvation is the only way which my Sahâba follow.” As a matter of fact, it is declared in the eightieth âyat of Nisâ Sûra: “He who obeys my Messenger has certainly obeyed Allâhu ta’âlâ.” To disobey the Messenger is to disobey Allâhu ta’âlâ. Disobeying him is disobeying Allâhu ta’âlâ. Declaring: “They want to differentiate between the way of Allâhu ta’âlâ and the way of His Messenger. They say, ‘We believe some of what you say but we do not believe others.’ They want to open a different way between the two. Certainly they are disbelievers,” about those who presume that obeying Allâhu ta’âlâ is different from obeying His Messenger, in the hundred and fiftieth âyat of Nisâ Sûra, He informs us that they are disbelievers. He who says that he follows the Prophet ‘alaihissalâtu wassalâm’ though he does not follow the way of the Sahâba ‘ridwânullahi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ is wrong. He has not followed him ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’; he has disobeyed him. He who has taken such a way will not be saved in the Hereafter. In the eighteenth âyat of Mujâdala Sûra, “They think they are doing something right. Be it known that they are liars, disbelievers,” He shows how such people are.

Those who follow the way of the Sahâba ‘alaihimurridwân’ are no doubt the group of the Ahl as-Sunnat wa-l-jamâ’at. May Allâhu ta’âlâ give plenty of rewards to the superiors of this group, who worked incessantly without falling tired! The group that will be saved from Hell is only this one. For, he who speaks ill of our Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba ‘alaihimurridwân’ is certainly deprived of following them. Such is the case for the sect of Shiite and the group of Khârijî.

[There are twelve groups of Shiites. Each group has parted into sub-groups. Some of them lead a life without an ablution, without a ghusl. Few of them perform namâz. They all hold non-Sunnî beliefs. They are not Alawîs. Alawî means a person who loves and follows the Ahl-i Bayt. Imâm-i Alî and his children from Hadrat Fâtima are called the Ahl-i Bayt. The honour of loving the Ahl-i Bayt has fallen to the lot of the Ahl as-Sunnat, who have said that loving and following them will cause one to die with îmân. Then, the real Alawîs are the Ahl as-Sunnat, not the Shi’îs. Therefore, a person who wants to be an Alawî has to be Sunnî. Today, zindîqs, and people who have no relationship with Islam appropriate the name of Alawî, plagiarizing it from the Ahl as-Sunnat. Under the shade of this beautiful name, they try to mislead the youth from Rasûlullah’s way. Our book entitled Documents of the Right Word provides detailed information on this subject.]

The Mu’tazila group appeared later. Wâsil bin Atâ, its founder, used to be a disciple of Hadrat Hasan-i Basrî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’; because he dissented from Hasan-i Basrî’s way by saying that there was a third mode between îmân and kufr, Hasan-i Basrî said, “I’tazala annâ,” about him, which means, “He has dissented from us.” All the other groups appeared later.

To slander the Sahâba means to slander Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. As declared: “He who disrespects the Sahâba does not have îmân in Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Messenger.” Indeed, to slander them means to slander their owner, their master ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us against lapsing into such a dirty creed. It is the Sahâba who conveyed to us the Sharî’at, which originated from the Qur’ân and from hadîths. When they are slandered, the thing which they conveyed too loses its value. The Sharî’at was not conveyed to us by a few certain persons among the Sahâba. Each of them has a service, a share in the blessed work. They are all equal in trueness, in justice and in (the authenticity of) their teaching. When any one of the Sahâba ‘alaihimurridwân’ is slandered, the Islamic dîn has been slandered and cursed. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us all from lapsing into such a loathsome situation!

If those who vituperate against the Sahâba say, “We still follow the Sahâba. It is not necessary to follow them all. In fact, it is not possible, for their words do not agree with each other. Their ways are different,” We will answer them as follows:

Following some of the Sahâba requires not denying any of them. When some of them are disliked, the others have not been followed. Amîr [Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’], for instance, respected the other three Khalîfas, deemed them great and knew that they were worth obeying. He obeyed them willingly and accepted them as Khalîfas. Unless the other three Khalîfas are loved, it will be a lie, a slander to say that one follows Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum’. In fact, it will mean to dislike Hadrat Alî and to refute his words. It would be a stupid and ignorant word to say about Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, who is Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Lion, that he handled them and that he only smiled at them. What wisdom could admit that Allah’s Lion, despite his great knowledge and bravery, concealed his enmity against the three Khalîfas, pretended to be friends with them and established a superficial friendship with them for a full period of thirty years. Even the lowest Muslim could not stomach such hypocrisy. We should recognize the ugliness of such words which belittle Hadrat Amîr to such an extent and which misrepresent him as impotent, deceitful and hypocritical. Even if we could suppose for a moment that Hadrat Amîr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was so —may Allah protect us from such a supposition— what would they say about the fact that our Master the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ praised these three Khalîfas, lauded them and esteemed them throughout his life? Would they say that our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was hypocritical, too? Never! It is impossible. It is wâjib for the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ to tell the truth. He who says that he was deceiving them becomes a zindiq and becomes irreligious. Allâhu ta’âlâ declares in the sixty-seventh âyat of Mâida Sûra: “O My dear Messenger! Proclaim what was sent down to you from your Allah! If you do not communicate this message correctly, you will not have done your duty as a Prophet! Allâhu ta’âlâ will protect you against those who mean enmity towards you.” The disbelievers had been saying that Hadrat Muhammad ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had been communicating whatever suited his purpose and not communicating whatever did not suit his purpose of the Qur’ân that had been revealed to him. Upon that, this âyat was revealed to declare that he had been telling the truth. Our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ praised the three Khalîfas and held them above all others until he honoured the Hereafter with his presence. This means to say that it cannot be erroneous or wrong to praise them or to hold them superior.

It is necessary to follow all of the Sahâba in the tenets to be believed, for there is no difference among them in the facts to be believed. There may be a difference in the furû’, that is, in practices.

A person who speaks ill of one of the Sahâba ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ has blemished all of them. For, the îmân, the belief held by all of them was the same. He who slanders one of them has followed none of them. He has said that they disagreed with one another and that there was no unity among them. To slander one of them means to deny what he said. Let us say once more that all the Sahâba communicated the Sharî’at. Each of them was just and right. There is something in the Sharî’at conveyed by each and every one of them. The Qur’ân al-kerîm is a collection of âyats; and each and every one of the Sahâba conveyed to us at least one or two of those âyats. He who dislikes some of them will have disliked the one who communicated the Sharî’at. As is seen, that person will have acted in contradiction with all of the Sharî’at. Can such a person be saved from Hell? Allâhu ta’âlâ declares in the eighty-fifth âyat of Baqara Sûra: “Do you believe some of the Qur’ân and disbelieve some of it! The punishment of those who do so will be abasement and humiliation in the world. And in the Hereafter they will be hurled down into the most vehement torment.”

The Qur’ân was collected by Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’. In fact, it was collected by Abû Bakr-i Siddîq and ’Umar Fârûq ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’. The Qur’ân that was collected by Hadrat Amîr was other than this one. As it can be understood, to slander these great people means in effect to slander the Qur’ân. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect all Muslims from lapsing into such a disastrous situation! One of the mujtahids of the Shiite sect was asked, “The Qur’ân was collected by Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’. What would you say about the Qur’ân collected by him?” He answered, “I do not see any use in finding fault with the Qur’ân, for slandering the Qur’ân causes the dîn to be demolished.”

Certainly, a wise person cannot say that all the Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ agreed on a wrong decision on the day when our Master the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ died. In fact, on that day thirty-three thousand of the Sahâba unanimously made Hadrat Abû Bakr-i Siddîq ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum’ Khalîfa willingly. It is impossible for thirty-three thousand Sahâbîs to agree on a mistake. As a matter of fact, our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had declared: “My Ummat never agrees on a wrong decision.” The reason why Hadrat Amîr was first sorry was because he was not called to those talks. He himself acknowledged that this was so and said, “I was sorry because I was called to the talks late. But I know well that Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is superior to us all.” There was a reason why he was called late. That is, he was then among the Ahl-i Bayt; he was busy consoling them.

The disagreements among the Sahâbîs ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ of our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ were not because of the desires of the nafs or for evil thoughts, for their blessed nafses had been purged and become quite pure. They had gotten rid of being ammâra and attained itmînan (to believe and understand the truth). Their only desire was to obey the Sharî’at. Their disagreements were based on a difference of ijtihâd. Their intention was to find what was right. Allâhu ta’âlâ will give one grade of thawâb to those who erred, too. There are at least two grades of thawâb for those who were right. We should not hurt any of those great people with our tongues! We should mention each of them with good terms. Hadrat Imâm-i Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’, who was one of the greatest savants of the Ahl as-sunnat, said, “Allâhu ta’âlâ did not smear our hands with their blood. So let us not smear our tongues!” Again, he said, “After Rasûlullah, the Sahâba pondered very much. Finding no one on earth superior to Abû Bakr-i Siddîq, they designated him as Khalîfa. They accepted to serve under him.” This statement of Imâm-i Shâfi’î also shows that Hadrat Alî was never hypocritical and that he willingly accepted Abû Bakr-i Siddîq as Khalîfa.

Mayân Shaikh Abulkhayr’s son, Mayân Sayyid, is a descendant of great and noble people. Also, he was in your service in the Dakkan expedition. It is hoped that he will be blessed with your help and kind treatment. Mawlânâ Muhammad ’Ârif is also a student of knowledge and a descendant of the great. His father is dead. He was a khodja. He came to you in order to receive his stipend. It is hoped that Your Highness will help him. Wassalâm wa-l-ikrâm!

[Islamic scholars have written very many books in order to prove that the Shiites have deviated from the right path and that especially the most unbridled and the most excessive of them have altogether dissented from Islam and have been striving to demolish Islam. The titles of some of them together with their authors have been given below. On behalf of religious brotherhood and humanity, I pray to Allâhu ta’âlâ that our brothers in Islam who say that they are Alawîs will read these books carefully and will observe the difference between the Ahl as-Sunnat and these people and choose the right way by using their wisdom, conscience and reason and not believe the lies and slanders of the ignorant separatists. Thereby they will attain happiness in this world and in the Hereafter by holding fast to the way of safety and salvation.

Of the books written by Islamic savants in order to advise the Shiites, here are a few:

1— The book Ibtâl-ul-Manhaj-il bâtil was written by Fadl bin Ruzbahân. It refutes the book Minhâj-ul-karâma by Ibn-ul-Mutahhir, one of the Shiite savants, and rebuts its falsifications by means of documents. He wrote the book in Isfahan in 852 [1448 A.D.]

2— The book Nuzhat-ul-ithnâ ashariyya, written by Mirzâ Ahmad bin Abdurrahîm-i Hindî, gives information about Shiites. He passed away in 1255 [A.D. 1839].

3— The book Nawâqid was written by Mirzâ Mahdûm. The book An-nawâqid lil-Rawâfid was written by Sayyid Muhammad bin Abdurrasûl Barzanjî, who was drowned in the sea in 1103 [1711 A.D.].

4— The book Muhtasar-i Nawâqid is an abridged version of the book Nawâqid. The abridgement was made by Muhammad bin Abdurrasûl-i Barzanjî.

5— The book Sayf-ul-bâtir li-riqab-ushshî’t-i warrâfida-til-kawâfir was written by Shaikh Alî bin Ahmad Hitî in Istanbul in 1025 A.H.

6— The book Ajwiba-tul Irâqiyya Alal’as’ilatil-Îrâniyya was written by Shihâbuddîn Sayyid Mahmûd bin Abdullah Âlûsî, a Shâfi’î scholar in Baghdâd (d.1270 [1854 A.D.]

7— The book Ajwiba-tul Irâqiyya Alal’as’ilatil-Lâhûriyya was written by Âlûsî. Also, Haydarî wrote a book with the same title.

8— The book Nafahât-ul-qudsiyya fî mabâhis-il-imâmiyya fî-radd-ish-shî’a, written by Âlûsî, refutes the Shiites.

10— The book Sârim-ul-hadîd was written by Muhammad Amîn bin Alî Baghdâdî. It confutes the slanders of Ibni Abil-Hadîd.

11— The book Raddu-alal-imâmiyya was written by Alî bin Muhammad Suwaydî Baghdâdî. He was in the Shâfi’î Madhhab. He passed away in Damascus in 1237 [1822 A.D.].

12— The book Hâdîqa-tus-sarâir was written by Abdullah bin Muhammad Bitûshî. He was a Shâfi’î of Baghdâd, and passed away in Basra in 1211 [1797 A.D.].

13— The book Tuhfa-i ithnâ asharîyya fî radd-ir-rawâfid was written in Persian by Shâh Abdul’âzîz-i Dahlawî. He passed away in 1239 [1824 A.D.]. Its Arabic translation was abridged by Shukrî Âlûsî and printed with the title Mukhtasar-i Tuhfa in Baghdad, and the abridged version was reproduced in Istanbul in 1976.

14— The book Minha-tul-ilâhiyya mukhtasar-i Tuhfa-i ithnâ ashariyya was written by Mahmûd Shukrî Âlûsî. It was printed in Cairo in 1373 A.H.

15— Imâm-i Rabbânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ explains the superiorities of the Sahâba very well with documentary proofs in his book Maktûbât.

16— The book Hujaj-i qat’iyya was written in Arabic by Abdullah-i Suwaydî. It was printed together with the Arabic book An-Nâhiya an’ta’n-i-Amîr-ul-mu’minîn Mu’âwiya in Istanbul in 1981.

17— In the books Milal-Nihal by Shihristânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ and in its Turkish, English, French and Latin versions, Shiism is explained in detail and answers are given.

18— The Turkish book Tazkiya-i Ahl-i Bayt gives beautiful answers to the Shiites. It was written by ’Uthmân Bey, who was the Shaikh of Topkapı Mevlevîhânesi, and it was printed in Istanbul in 1295 A.H. Along with Hujaj-i Qat’iyya, it was printed in the Latin alphabet within the Turkish book Hak Sözün Vesîkaları in Istanbul.[87]

19— Hadrat Imâm-i Rabbânî’s ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ book Radd-i-Rawâfid is in Persian and its Turkish version has been printed in the Latin alphabet within the book Hak Sözün Vesîkaları in Istanbul. (Please see footnote.)

20— The great savant Ibni Hajar-i Haytamî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ proves that Shiites are wrong with âyats and hadîths in his book Savâ’iq-ul-muhriqa.

21— Ibni Hajar, again, proves very well that Hadrat Mu’âviyya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ cannot be spoken ill of in his book Tathîr-ul-janân wallisân an Mu’âwiyya-tabni-Abî Sufyân.

22— Ibni Taymiyya, in his book Minhâjus-sunna-tinnabawiyya fî naqdi kalâm-ish-shî’as wa-l-qadariyya, refutes the book Minhâj-ul-karâma by Ibnil-Mutahhîr, one of the Shiite savants, with sound documents.

23— Ibni Taymiyya, again, explains the superiorities of the Sahâba, with sound documents in his book Fadâil-i Abû Bakr wa ’Umar.

24— In the translation of Mavâhib-i ladunniyya and in Mir’ât-i kâinât the glory of the Sahâba is explained.

25— The Turkish pamphlet captioned Sahâba-t-al kirâm by Sayyid Abdulhakîm-i Arwâsî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’aleyh’ was printed in Istanbul.[88]

26— The book Nûr-ul-Hudâ, written by Karakashzâda ’Umar bin Muhammad Bursawî Halwatî in 1005 A.H. [1597 A.D.], confutes the Shiites and Baktâshîs. It was printed in Istanbul in 1286 A.H. He passed away in Edirne in 1047 [1638 A.D.].

27— Manâqib-i Chihâr yâr-i ghuzîn, which is in Turkish, explains the superiorities of the Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum ajma’în’ very well. It was written by Sayyid Ayyûb bin Siddîq Urmawî. It was reprinted various times. The edition of 1264 A.H. is so beautiful.

28— Shiism is explained and the advice which Islamic savants gave to them are explained in full length in the Turkish books Ashâb-i kirâm, Hak Yolun Vesîkaları, Herkese Lâzım Olan Îmân, and Fâideli Bilgiler, which have been edited various times in Istanbul. [Of these three books, the second one, Hak Sözün Vesîkaları, was rendered into English in 1992. The English version, entitled Documents of the Right Word, consists of 480 pages and is vastly informative and competently corroborative.]

29— It is written in the books Berîqa and Hadîqa that those who believe in transmigration and those who hold the belief that Allah entered a certain person’s body are disbelievers.

30— Yûsuf Nabhânî, in the final part of his book Shawâhid-ul-haqq, gives very beautiful responses with documents to the Shiites.

31— Sayyid Ahmad Dahlân ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ vehemently refutes the Shiites in his book Al-fat-hul-mubîn. This book of his was printed as a complementary at the end of Hujaj-i qat’iyya by Suwaydî. (Please see item 18.)

32— Shah Waliyullah-i Dahlawî ‘rahmatullâhi ’aleyh’ refutes the Shiites with strong documents and praises Hadrat Mu’âwiyya very highly in his book Izâlat-ul-hafâ an khilâfat-ul-khulafâ. The book, in Persian, was printed in Pakistan in 1392 [1972 A.D.] together with its Urdu translation. It consists of two volumes.]

Muhammad Ma’thûm Fârûqî Mujaddidî, a Walî-yi kâmil and one of the greatest scholars of India, states as follows in a passage of his twenty-ninth letter:

Allâhu ta’âlâ asked Mûsâ (Moses) ‘alaihis-salâm’: “Yâ Mûsâ! What deed have you performed for Me?” When Hadrat Mûsâ replied, “Yâ Rabbî! I have performed namâz, fasted, paid zakât, and mentioned Thine Name very often for Thee,” Allâhu ta’âlâ declared: “Performing namâz is burhân (proof, evidence, document) for you. Fasting is a shield that will protect you from Hell. Zakât will give you welcome shade in the sweltering heat of the day of mahsher (assembling of people for judgement in the world to come). And dhikr (mentioning, remembering the name of Allâhu ta’âlâ) will be a nûr (light) for you in the darkness of that day. What have you done for Me?” Mûsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ said, “Yâ Rabbî! What is the deed which is for Thee?” Allâhu ta’âlâ declared: “Have you loved for My sake a slave of Mine whom I love? And have you looked on My enemies as your enemies as well?” Then Mûsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’ realized that the deed which Allâhu ta’âlâ loved was to love His beloved ones and to hate His enemies. As is seen, it is a symptom of love to love those who are beloved to the beloved one and to feel enmity towards his enemies. This love is not something within the lover’s willpower; nor is the concomitant animus. They are spontaneous. Other acts of worship, by contrast, necessitate wish and intention. People loved by the beloved one appear beautiful to the lover. And his enemies seem ugly. Everyone knows that the same rule applies to all the cases of worldly love. If a person says that he loves another person, he will not be believed if he does not feel hostility towards that person’s enemies. On the contrary, his claim will be interpreted as hypocrisy. Shaikh-ul-islâm Abdullah Ansârî relates: “One day Abû-l-Husayn bin Sem’ûn hurt my teacher Muhammad Husrî. Since that day I have never felt any sympathy for him. If a person hurts your master and you do not feel hurt, too, you are lower than a dog.” Allâhu ta’âlâ declares as follows in the Mumtahina sûra: “Ibrâhîm (Abraham) ‘alaihis-salâm’ and his Sahâba (Companions) said to the polytheists: We are far from you and your idols. We do not believe you. There will be enmity between you and us until we see that you believe in Allah, who is one. That beautiful attitude of theirs should be an example for you (to follow).” Another âyat-i-kerîma, which comes later, purports: “Therein is a beautiful example for those who have belief in Allâhu ta’âlâ and in the Last Day.” As these âyat-i-kerîmas indicate, that enmity is essential for being a true Believer, and it annihilates one’s îmân (belief) to feel sympathy for enemies of Allâhu ta’âlâ. That means to say that antipathy should be felt towards the enemies of the beloved one. This subtle maxim, however, is what the Râfidîs delude themselves with. They say that “Loving Hadrat Alî necessitates animosity against the Ashâb-i-kirâm.” They do not seem to realize that the enmity stipulated should be against the enemies of the beloved one, not against the friends. People who had attained the honour of Rasûlullah’s sohbat loved one another very much. They were inimical not towards one another, but towards unbelievers. The twenty-ninth âyat-i-kerîma of the Fat-h sûra purports: “...; and those who are with him are strong against unbelievers, (but) compassionate against one another. ...” (48-29). This âyat-i-kerîma corroborates our argument.

The kashfs that appear in the heart and dreams are not dependable. What we should depend on are the Book and the Sunnat, which are the sources that guide mankind to eternal happiness. [These two sources are the Qur’ân al-kerîm and (Rasûlullah’s utterances, which are called) hadîth-i-sherîfs, and also the books written by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat and which elucidate and expound the two sources. A person who wishes to learn the Book and the Sunnat will have to read these books written by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. People who read books written by holders of bid’at, by people not affiliated in one of the (four) canonically sanctioned Madhhabs, or by people who advocate that Islam should be reformed, will drift down into perdition.] We should learn the Book and the Sunnat [from the books written by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat] and perform our acts of worship in a manner they prescribe. Dhikr (remembering and mentioning) of the name of Allâhu ta’âlâ is something which the Sharî’at commands. Do dhikr very much and continually! The highest grade of Wilâyat (being a Walî, pl. Awliya) is to attain the ma’rifat of Allâhu ta’âlâ [Ma’rifat means to comprehend the Attributes of Allâhu ta’âlâ. It is realized after attaining the spiritual grade termed Fanâ.] There are two stages of Fanâ: The first stage of Fanâ, called Fanâ-i-qalb, means the heart’s forgetting about everything except Allâhu ta’âlâ. Once a person has attained this grade, his heart will not remember anything except Allâhu ta’âlâ, try hard as he may to do so, and love of Allâhu ta’âlâ has permeated through his heart so as to leave no place for love of anything else. The second stage, termed Fanâ-i-nafs, is a person’s forgetting about his own existence as well. A person who has attained this grade can no longer say, ‘I.’ To remember or love anything but Allâhu ta’âlâ is a poison for the ’ârif, (i.e. a person who has attained ma’rifat of Allâhu ta’âlâ); it is a desease which will drag the heart to death. Once Fanâ has been attained, the heart will free itself from loving the mâ-siwâ [everything (with the exception of Allâhu ta’âlâ)]; it will attain real îmân, and it will be easy and pleasant (for the person who has such a heart) to adapt himself to the Sharî’at. Ikhlâs will be attained. The nafs will get rid of its (evil attribute called) ammâra, attaining (the blessed attribute called) itmi’nân. The nafs-i-ammâra is hostile towards the Sharî’at, [i.e. Allâhu ta’âlâ’s commandments and prohibitions.] Once it has attained itmi’nân, it will take pleasure from obeying the Sharî’at. The state attained is termed Islâm-i-haqîqî (true, real Islam). In short, Tasawwuf means sayr and sulûk. Its target is to make one attain Fanâ and Baqâ, to make one a true slave of Allâhu ta’âlâ, and to purge the nafs of its wayward, disobedient and pleasure-seeking attributes. One’s purpose in Tasawwuf, therefore, should not be the opening the sight of one’s heart so that one can see nûrs, souls, angels and genies, to join their world, or [to learn what is naturally unknown (to other people) by asking those invisible creatures]. It is not something reasonable to try to learn about the unknown by means of the heart’s sight, turning away from the scientific phenomena, which can be perceived by the senses and found by calculation and experimentation. Both the types of phenomena, i.e. those found by scientific methods as well as the ones that will be perceived by the hearts’s sight, are Allâhu ta’âlâ’s creatures. All of them were nonexistent. Allâhu ta’âlâ created all of them afterwards. Allâhu ta’âlâ cannot be seen in the world. He will be seen in the Hereafter. The suppositional perception (of Allâhu ta’âlâ) which can be experienced in the world and after which one believes that one has seen Allâhu ta’âlâ, (though one actually has not,) is called îqân.

In short, the purpose in (undertaking the onerous spiritual process called) Tasawwuf, or Tarîqat, should be to attain an immaculate and delectable obedience to the Sharî’at in the world. It should not be to attain a state of seeing or approaching Allâhu ta’âlâ. These things will be attained in the Hereafter. Then, our primary concern should be to try to obey the Sharî’at, not to be remiss in [spreading the Sharî’at, which is called] amr-i-ma’rûf and nahy-i-munkar, and to resuscitate those commandments of the Sharî’at which people have forgotten about. In case some kashfs and other spiritual states occur in our heart, we should not tell anyone about them. These states and dreams are not dependable. What is the use of a person’s dreaming himself as, say, a Sultan or the chief of Awliyâ? What is of value is to attain these things as one is alive. However, valuable as it is, what is its use, either? Will it save one from torment in grave or in Hell? A wise person will not attach any importance to such things. He will try to do things which Allâhu ta’âlâ approves of. He will hold fast to the blessing of hubb-i-fillâh (love for the sake of Allah) and bughd-i-fillah (enmity for the sake of Allah). [First of all, it is necessary to learn the creed of Ahl as-Sunnat and the teachings of the Sharî’at, to adapt your belief to that creed and to adhere to the Sharî’at.]

I pray so that we will not deviate from the path followed by our fathers and grandfathers, who were true Muslims. The true path, the path to salvation, is the path they followed and also taught in their books. O my brother! We are living in the latest time. Religious knowledge is on the decrease. There has been a general slackening in obeying the Sharî’at. Sunnats have been abandoned, and bid’ats have been spread far and wide. [The masonic organizations of infidelity established by British agents and priestly missionaries, propagated with fallacious books, supported with monstrous amounts of money and weaponry, and in cooperation with heretical groups of soi-disant Muslims called Râfidîs and Wahhâbîs, are waging a universal smear campaign against the true Muslims called Ahl as-Sunnat.] In this time of obscurity, when unbelief and heresies are so widespread, it is the primary duty of the descendants of true Muslims to learn their religion, (Islam), from books written by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat and to spread these books everywhere. It is the most valuable work to resuscitate forgotten religious teachings. Work round the clock to learn the teachings of the Sharî’at and to publicize them. Do not go into politics. Pray continuously and call upon Allâhu ta’âlâ for help! [We are slaves of Allâhu ta’âlâ. We have to do our duties as His slaves. For doing so, we have to have a correct belief (îmân) and obey the Sharî’at. Do not think even for a moment of having your heart’s sight opened and being able to see genies, angels and spirits, to talk with them and to learn about unknown things! Learn the existence, the unity and the greatness of Allâhu ta’âlâ not from such transcendental reports, but from scientific and medical phenomena. The human mind is the place for the teachings acquired from such phenomena. Mind’s busying itself with science, medicine, arms race, trade or agriculture will not prevent the heart’s attaining Fanâ or forgetting about worldly occupations. Preoccupied as a person’s mind may be in worldly occupations, not even momentarily will his heart be oblivious of Allâhu ta’âlâ. As a matter of fact, the Sharî’at commands such occupations, e.g. to emulate the enemy in the preparation of means of war in peace time. Doing this commandment of the Sharî’at will polish the heart, thus helping it to attain Fanâ. Râfidîs or Wahhâbîs, or their Christian and Jewish sponsors will not understand these facts which we write. Both mentally and spiritually, they are entirely absorbed in worldly interests and sensuous desires and pleasures. All four groups cooperate in their inimical activities against the Ahl as-Sunnat. Their ignominious campaigns are manipulated by British plotters.]

Due to the great distance between the time in which we live and the luminous and blessed time of Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’, and the time of Doomsday being rather closer, unbelief and heresies (bid’ats) have spread far and near. The entire world is suffused with their gloom. The Sunnat of the Messenger of Allah, [i.e. his path, the commandments and prohibitions of the Sharî’at,] has been forgotten. The nûrs (lights, haloes) of the Sharî’at have disappeared. Try to revitalize the Sharî’at and to promulgate Islam’s teachings! This work is atop all the other deeds that will please Allâhu ta’âlâ. It is this work which will be most prolific in attaining the shafâ’at (intercession) of the Messenger of Allah. It is stated as follows in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “A person who recovers one of my forgotten sunnats will be rewarded with thawâb equal to the amount of the thawâb that will be given to a hundred martyrs.” [Sunnat in this context means one of the commandments of the Sharî’at.] To recover a sunnat, (i.e. a commandment of the Sharî’at,] you will first have to practise it yourself, and then publicize it so that others also should practise it.

You write that you feel deep anxiety about how you will be at the time of death, (i.e. whether you will be able to retain your îmân and die as a Believer.) No one has been immune from that anxiety. You say that you do not believe you have attained a state with which Allâhu ta’âlâ is pleased. Only in the era of Wahy (revelation of the Qur’ân al-kerîm) was it possible for a person to be invulnerable to that feeling of uncertainty. What the times that followed it could afford were no more than facsimiles and analogues of the original Glad Tidings. Because of the uncertainty of the result, anxiety cannot be helped. You say that you suffer for want of hope as to whether your acts of worship will be accepted (by Allâhu ta’âlâ, and that the absence of hope sometimes transforms into laxity in your acts of worship. Acts of worship have been enjoined on us. Therefore, it is our primary duty to do the acts of worship. Regardless of whether we know that our worship will be accepted, we have to perform the acts of worship, say (the prescribed phrase of apology called) istighfâr for our faults during the performance, and beg Allâhu ta’âlâ to accept our worship. Thereby, there will be more probability of our worship being accepted, less zulmat (darkness, gloom, obscurity) (caused by our faults), and more luminosity. Worship is our essential duty as slaves. Anything else is a misgiving infused by the devil. You ask if I am pleased with you. The affection that you feel for us is the fruit of the affection that we have for you. Whatsoever appears on the branches of a tree comes from the trunk. It is declared in the Mâida sûra: “Allâhu ta’âlâ loves them, and they in turn love Him.” “Allâhu ta’âlâ is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him.” He states His love of them and His being pleased with them before stating their love of Him and their being pleased with Him.

No one do I blame, for myself I shed tears,
Anxious about my future, trembling with fears!

This is a long letter. At one place it says: Greek philosophers argue that “Nonexistence will not come into existence. And something which exists will not cease to exists.” [Today’s science imitators say so, too. Not only is this view incompatible with Islam, but these people call those who hold this view ‘progressive people’. And they call Muslims ‘regressive people’ because they say that “All things were nonexistent. Allâhu ta’âlâ created all of them from nothing.”] What these science imitators say is only a product of their fancy and imagination. It is quite easy for Allâhu ta’âlâ, who is almighty, to create all things from nothing or to annihilate the existence. When Lavoisier (Antoine Laurent, 1743-94), French chemist and physician, who was executed by the French revolutionary leaders in 1209 (1794 A.D.), observed that substances did not cease to exist during chemical reactions, he said, “Nothing in nature ceases to exist, and nothing comes into being from nonexistence.” He said so because he thought everything was dependent on chemical reactions. The irreligious science imitators, who call themselves ‘illuminated modernists’ and Muslims ‘fuddy-duddies’, exploited Lavoisier’s theory as a document and clamoured that nothing had been created from nonexistence, thus misleading many a Muslim student of science. Einstein (Albert, 1879-1955), German-American physicist, (developed the theory of relativity and) proved that matter ceased to exist by turning into energy. The dumbfounded progressive impostors of science, whose idiotic notion of Allâhu ta’âlâ had been confined to chemical reactions, stopped vociferating and began fumbling around for other ploys to undermine Islam.]

All heavenly religions concur in the fact that the entire existence was created from nothing, and deniers of this fact are ‘unbelievers’ in their credal nomenclatures. The sixty-seventh âyat of Maryam sûra purports: “But does not man call to mind that We created him before out of nothing?” Qâdî Abdullah Baydâwî, whom the scholars of Tafsîr (exegesis, expounding of the Qur’ân al-kerîm) hold as their most beloved master and guide, makes the following observation in his book of Tafsîr entitled Anwâr-ut-tanzîl: “Allâhu ta’âlâ created man from nothing.” To theorize that creation of all new beings from nothing is not a constant process would mean to imply that Allâhu ta’âlâ has no more to do (with the new things’ coming into being) and therefore His power is no longer effective. Allâhu ta’âlâ creates all substances from nothing and then every moment keeps each and every one of them in existence. Therefore, matter cannot cease to exist from itself. Objects come into being from substances. Their attributes change continuously. Allâhu ta’âlâ is the only maker of all these material transfigurations and attributive changes. Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Attributes are the only beings which remain in existence eternally and never change. Neither they were created from nonexistence, nor will they cease to exist.

’Âlam, i.e. the entire existence, existed in the ’ilm-i-ilâhî (Allâhu ta’âlâ’s knowledge) as it was (materially) nonexistent. What existed in the ’ilm-i-ilâhî has been termed a’yân-i-thâbita; that state of existence has been termed thubût-i-eshyâ; (material state of) existence in the outside has been termed wujûd-i-eshyâ (by the scholars of Islamic science called Kalâm).

’Abdiyyat, i.e. being a slave of Allâhu ta’âlâ, requires believing in Him and loving Him. Obeying the Sharî’at and avoiding bid’ats are symptomatic of this belief and love. As we observe, all things, nonexistent as they were, have been created in a perfectly calculated order. For instance, all the human organs are created in ultimate neatness, each representing immaculately well-planned sketches. These utterly admirable phenomena indicate that everything has been created by an owner of endless knowledge and power.

We are so happy to hear about your aspirations to obtain ikhlâs in spite of all your various occupations and activities. “If They were not to give (what is desired), They would not have given the desire,” goes the saying. The patient has to tell the doctor his complaints. Rasûlullah is the source of fayz. Yet the fayz coming from him undergoes changes as it goes through intermediaries. In the path of our superiors, it is essential to attend the Murshid’s sohbat. Of the fayz emanating from the Murshid’s heart, an amount proportionate with the disciple’s personal capacity and the affection he feels (towards his Murshid) will flow into his heart. If the tâlib (disciple) cannot find a murshid (to guide him), he must read a past murshid’s books and receive from the murshid’s soul an amount of fayz proportionate to the affection which is formed in his heart towards the murshid (by reading his books). Uways Qarnî, [i.e. Ways-al-Qarânî,] did not attain a grade equal to the one attained by any one of the Ashâb-i-kirâm, since he had not seen Rasûlullah, although he became a great Walî, –in fact, he was the highest of the Tâbi’în–, by receiving fayz (from the Prophet’s blessed soul) remote as he was (from the Best of Mankind). The affection you feel towards men of Tasawwuf is a great blessing. Appreciate the value of this blessing! There is Glad Tidings for you in the hadîth-i-sherîf, “A person will be with people he loves.” It bears the good news that we will reap benefits from the hearts of the people we love. Attach great importance to acts of worship! Do not waste your valuable time on revelries, romps or merriments! Always keep in mind that we are merely transient lodgers in the world and be constantly apprehensive about the torment in grave and on the Last Day. Never forget that the only way to salvation leads through obedience to the Sharî’at and clear of bid’ats! Do not make friends with holders of bid’at and people not affiliated in any of the (four canonically validated) Madhhabs! Those people are thieves of faith. They will steal your îmân. Do not believe those shaikhs and men of Tarîqat who are slack in obeying the Sharî’at! [Avoid the Râfidîs, the Wahhâbîs, and their books and radio and television programmes!]

O you, young man! As follows is the Sunnî Creed,
Written in verse and expressed in clear diction:

If you want a correct belief, o my brother,
Read this book day’n night with devout attention!

May Haqq bless Abû Hanîfa’s soul with compassion,
For he’s guided us to Qur’ân’s way of salvation!

Man can create none, do not believe the Shiite!
Worse for the Wahhâbî; hold the Sunnî profession!

Paradise’n Hell are now, tawba is possible,
The sinful will be saved by way of intercession.

Do not attach thyself to the world, life’s but a fast stream;
Happiness forever is in Islam’s instruction.

First learn the ’ilm al-hâl, and teach your child;
Otherwise, insufferable will be your frustration!

Look’n see how slyly the enemies strive;
Lose no time in working for Islam’s promulgation!

Communists deceive the youth with lies to destroy Islam;
Wake up, O young man, rid thyself of that inaction!

The Muslims also are mostly ensnared by heresies;
Off the right path, qibla as is their direction.

Without learning the ’ilm al-hâl, one cannot be immune.
Non-Sunnî is in unbelief or aberration!

Help the people who spread the correct knowledge!
Be blessed with Jihâd at the cost of thine possession!

Did Rasûlullah ever pause, or did his Sahâba sleep?
Each of them was a hero in Islam’s expansion!

You, too, should work hard, for hard the enemies work;
To ruin Islam they attack from every direction.

Do not malign the Sahâba, appreciate them all!
Qur’ân witnesses to their common affection!

Abû Bakr the highest, then come ’Umar; ’Uthmân; Alî;
Love Mu’âwiya, too; he wrote the Qur’ân’s version!

Our Rabb is not material; He’s free from time’n place;
He is in no substance, should be Muslim’s conviction!

He neither needs creatures, nor has a likeness;
He creates all, and sustains all creation.

Good, bad; belief, disbelief; matter, power, energy; He makes all;
Far beyond man is the business of creation!

Everyone He’s given will’n wisdom, and guidance as well.
Any good wished will attain Rahmân’s[89] creation.

First put your belief right, and observe the injunctions;
Whoever leaves Islam never attains salvation!

It’s ever the rule: You reap what you sow;
To count on the wheat unsowed brings frustration!

Out of seventy-three groups, Sunnîs, alone, head for salvation;
It is them who showed us Rasûlullah’s direction!

A hijrî lunar year is 10.875 days shorter than a Christian year. A hijrî year begins approximately eleven days earlier in the Christian year following the Christian year in which the previous hijrî year began. Once every 33.58 hijrî years, which means once every 32.58 Christian years, the beginning of hijrî year coincides with one of the first days of January. Chart I shows the hijrî years beginning in December. The hijrî year-beginnings following these move yearly from this twelfth month backwards to the first month, coinciding with each of the Christian months. For finding the Christian month corresponding with the beginning of any of such hijrî years which the chart does not contain, the hijri year that is closest to it and which the chart contains is found on the chart, and thereby the Christian year next to this hijrî year on the chart. The difference between the two hijrî years is added to the Christian year found on the chart. For instance, let us find the Christian year coinciding with the beginning of 1344 hijrî: 1344-1330=14; 1911+14=1925. It coincides with July, which is below number 14 on Chart II. The Christian year with which a certain Christian month within a certain hijrî year coincides, if this certain month is before the month with which the beginning of the hijrî year coincides, is one year ahead of the year found.

Before your body goes out of your possession,
Before destiny demolishes your construction.

As the façade and the inner essence are together,
As both the worlds are still in your possession.

Dispel love of the world from your heart,
So that from the world of souls you get information!

Abstain from harâms, engage in doing the farz,
Negligence of the farz will bring you destruction!

[82] Closeness to Allâhu ta’âlâ.
[83] The Messenger of Allah.
[84] There is detailed information on how to make masah on the pair of mests as you make ablution in the third chapter of the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss. Please see the list at the end of this book.
[85] Person with much zuhd, which in turn means to abstain from most of the mubâhs (Islam’s permissions) for the fear that they may be harâm (forbidden by Islam).
[86] The eighth chapter of the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss provides detailed information on women nâ-mahram to a man and men who are nâ-mahram to a woman.
[87] This book was translated into English in 1992. The English version, entitled Documents of the Right Word, is available from Hakîkat Kitâbevi, Darüşşefeka Cad. 57/A P.K. 35 34262 Fâtih-İstanbul-Türkiye.
[88] The book you have been reading is its English version.
[89] Compassionate, (He) whose compassion encompasses all in the world; one of Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Attributes.