02
منذ 3 سنوات
336
The fact is that the Shi'as attained such an exalted rank in the field of literature that experts had to say: 'Is there any literary man who is not a Shi'a?' It is worth noting that in praising some piece of composition, there was a common saying that such and such a man writes like the Shi'as. Some people have written that Mutanabbi and Abu 'l-'ula were also Shi'as (please refer to where some of their verses are quoted).
Shi'a poets of the Quraysh family such as Fadhl ibn 'Abbas (whose life history is given in "al-Aghani"), Abu Dihbal Jamhi, Wahib ibn Rabi'ah and the literary scholars such as Sharif Radi, Murtadha, Sharif Abu'l Hasan 'Ali 'Alawin Jumani son of Sharif Muhammad ibn Ja'far ibn Muhammad ibn Zayd ibn 'Ali ibn al-Husayn (a.s.) are also worthy of attention.
Sharif Jumani used to say "I am a poet; my father was a poet; my grandfather was a poet". Muhammad ibn al-'Alawi was an eminent man of letters. Writing about him
"Oh descendents of Hashim ibn 'Abd Munaf! wherever I am be I am yours.
"You are God's chosen ones, and Ja'far Tayyar belongs to your own family.
"Ali, the Lion of God, Hamzah the uncle of the Prophet and al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the members of your own family.
"Yes, though I am of Amawi lineage, yet I have no concern with Banu Umayyah."
Similarly, the name of Abu Warda, the well-known author on Najdi and 'Iraqi schools of thought, is also worthy of mention. Apart from these there are also many other notables of this lineage, but since this book is being written without preparation it is difficult to give details of all of them.
When we study the history of great kings, distinguished politicians, statesmen and viziers, we find the Shi'as likewise in prominence also. Besides the Fatimid and Bawayhid rulers, other kings like Al Hamdan, Banu Mazid, Banu Wasis, 'Imran ibn Shahid, Muqallid ibn Musayyab, 'Aqili and Qarwash ibn Musayyab were all Shi'as. Also the faith in Shi'ism of Wajihu 'd-dawlah Dhu 'l-qarnayn Taghlabi and Tamim ibn Mu'izin the ruler of Marakish is not a
If we now consider the early Muslim viziers (ministers) we find that nearly all of them are Shi'as.
Ishaq Katib, for example, was perhaps the first person for whom the appellation of Vizier was formally used.
Abu Salmah Khilal al-Kufi was the vizier of the first 'Abbasid Caliph. In view of his administrative capability Sffah entrusted him with all the affairs of the State. Abu Salmah was known as the "Wazir Al Muhammad" and it was because of his love for Al Muhammad that he was martyred on the order of the same Saffah.
Abu 'Abdillah Ya'qub ibn Dawud was the Vizier of al-Mahdi al-'Abbasi; the Caliph confided the entire administration of the state to him. This verse, "Oh Banu Umayyah! Get up! And arise from your deep slumbe! Ya'qub ibn Dawud is the Caliph", refers to him. He too was to later suffer captivity for his Shi'a belief.
Al-Nawbakht and Banu Sahl are well known as the families of the viziers. Fadl ibn Sahl and Hasan ibn Sahl were the viziers of Ma'mun ar-Rashid. Similarly from Banu al-Furat, Hasan ibn 'Ali was thrice made the vizier of the Caliph Muqtadar. Abu 'l-Fadhl Ja'far, Abu 'l-Fath Fadhl ibn Ja'far and 'Amid Muhammad ibn Husayn and his eldest son Dhu 'l-kifayatayn Abu 'l-Fath 'Ali bin Muhammad were the viziers of Rukn ad-dawlah.
Banu Tahir Khyza'i was likewise entrusted with ministership by Ma'mun. Other viziers were Mahlabi, Abu Dalf 'Ajalli, Sahib ibn 'Ibad, the great politician Maghribi and Abu 'Abdillah Husayn ibn Zakariya, who is known by the epithet "Shi'i".
There are others besides them, such as Ibrahim Suli, Talaya' ibn Zarik, Afdhal, the commander-in-chief of Egypt and his son Ja'far ibn Muhammad ibn Fatit, Abu 'l Mu'ali
Among other Shi'as entrusted with administrative posts wer may mention the author of "al-Awraq", (Suli) Yahya ibn Salamah Hasfaki and ibn Nadim (the author of "al-Fihrist"), Abu Ja'far ibn Yusuf and his brother Abu Muhammad Qasim (whose panegyrics and elegies upon the Ahlu 'l-bayt have no parallel: see "al-Awraq") were "mu'tamad 'umumi (general secretaries) during the time of Ma'mun, and even for a considerable time after the latter's death. Similarly the names of Ibrahim Uysuf and his son, the master of the Arabic language and author of "al-Mu'jam", Abu 'Abdillah Muhammad ibn 'Imran Marzbani, are also worth remembering, Sam'ani has made mention of their Shi'ism. Viewed in the same perspective ther are hundreds of persons whose adminstrative abilities, political sagacity and national services would need volumes and volumes to be recorded.
My late father had tried to collect the life histories of different groups of Shi'as. He classified thirty groups into alphabetical order in ten volumes, under the titles "Ulama (scholars), philosophers, kings, viziers, astronomers and physicians, etc." The name of this collection is "al-Husun al-Mani'ah fi Tabaqat ash-Shi'a". This voluminous book despite its nature is not complete.
At this stage we would also like to ask the author of "Fajru 'l-Islam" whether, in his opinion, these persons who had established the teachings of Islam and provided the basis for true knowledge and learning, wanted to ruin our
And again the question arises whether he and his teacher Dr. Taha Husayn are true supporters of the Islamic religion. If that is the case, we can bid farewell to Islam, or rather we may quote the words of a poet, if one calls Hatim Ta'i a stingy person "it is better to die than to live oneself with such a narrow outlook on life."
In fact it was not my aim to write at such length but the pen moved on regardless. We hope that the present-day or future writers might learn something from it and they may at least be careful in the manner of their writing and may express their thoughts only after researching into their subject.
Islam's greatest sage Hadhrat 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) says: "A wise man's tongue is subordinate to his heart, and the heart of an ignorant person is obedient to his tongue."
Ahmad Amin's opinion that "the belief in Raj'ah" (the return) came from Judaism among the Shi'as" is extremely deplorable. I wish they would make it clear whether "raj'ah" is the main element of Shi'ism, whether it is one of the fundamental beliefs of their religion, so that they may justify their criticism. If one's knowledge is of this nature, is it not proper for him to hold his tongue and preserve his dignity?
The fact is that faith in "raj'ah" is not one of the fundamentals of Shi'ism. Of course recognising its validity is considered necessary, just as in other Islamic groups one should affirm the events of the unseen and the signs of doomsday: we may mention for instance, the coming of Christ and the appearance of the Djjal, which all the sects believe in. These are not counted among the principles of Islam nor is their denial the cause of explusion from
Indeed even if it is demonstrated that it relates to the roots of the faith of the Shi'as, we should ask whether concurrence with any Jewish belief is the result of Jewish influence. The Muslims believe in the oneness of God. The Jews also worship one God. As a result of these shared views, can anyone have the courage to talk of the influence of Judaism? It would be interesting to see what these people who indulge in taunts and emotional slander have to say in this matter.
"God Almighty will give life to a gorup of people for the second time." Is it an impossibility? Has this story never been mentioned in the Book of God? "Consider, oh Muhammad, those of a past age who left their homes in their thousands, fearing death, and God said to them: Die, and then be brought back to life." (2:243) Has the following holy verse never been read by anybody? "And the day on which We shall raise a group form every "ummah" (27:83). If it means the day of judgement, then on that day not a group from every ummah but all the ummahs (peoples) will be restored to life.
This is not a new affair. The 'ulema of the majority community have been making this matter a target of attack since the very beginning. It has been noted, in this connection that when they do not find any grounds for criticising the veracity of an eminent Shi'a reporter of hadith, they begin taunting the Shi'as about "raj'ah" as if they were accusing someone of idol-worshipping or polytheism. Relative to this problem in question is the well known story of Mu'min at-Taq and Abu Hanifah. We believe, however, that this matter does not merit further argument. We consider it sufficient to have established the moral
The author of "Fajru 'l-Islam" says: "The fire of gehennam will not be allowed to burn the Shi'as, except for a few among them and then only for a time." Only God knows from which Shi'a book this view has been taken. I wish the learned writer had some better evidence and could provide the necessary proof for this view.
The Shi'a books clearly says: "Paradise is the reward for the obedient servants of God even if he is an Abyssinian slave, and hell is for the wicked even if he is one of the Sayyids of Quraysh. Traditions on the above subject have been related by the Holy Imams (a.s.) and they are so many in number that they can hardly be counted. If the above mentioned author is referring to the intercession of the Prophet (s.a.w.) or the Imams (a.s.) then of course the question of intercession is another matter which all the Muslims believe in. This matter will be dealt with in more detail in another book.
Suffice it to say that belief in such a matter is hardly a reason to say that Shi'ism has been taken from Judaism just because the latter shows this belief.
Abu Hanifah agrees in some question of marriage (mikah) with the Zoroastrians, but would it be appropriate to say that the Imam of the Hanafis had based his 'fiqh' (jurisprudence) on Zoroastrianism? And for further proof, advantage could be taken of his being a man of Iranian descent. In short, these are all baseless ways and means through which the desires of certain Shi'ahs men for mutual confusion and discord among the various Muslim sects are fulfilled.
The alleged influences of Christianity in the Shi'a religion is another taunt, which is hardly less painful. Honesty should demand tha Ahmad Amin research his
But the Imamia Shi'as who number millions in Iraq, Iran and the subcontinent of India and Afghanistan are, as Shi'as, free from such beliefs, and regard these conceptions as infedility and digression from the right path. Their religion is pure 'tawhid' (Oneness of God). Neither do they believe that God resembles any created being, nor do they tolerate that His perfect attributes be considered defective or comparable to creation's attributes; rather they consider any concept which is the negation of His eternal existence and attributes utterly wrong.
The metaphysical beliefs of the Shi'as are carefully explained in numerous books. The smaller "at-Tajrid" of Khwajah Nasiru 'd-din at-Tusi, or the monumental "Kitab al-Afsar" of Sadru 'd-din ash-Shirazi, both merit sutdy in this subject. There are thousands of other books in which the theories of metempsychosis, divine union and re-incarnation are proved erroneous.
However the author of "Fajru 'l-Islam", by levelling utterly false charges against the Shi'as, has not done any useful service to the religion of Islam and its ummat (nation). Since we have shown in some detail that the book "Fajru 'l-Islam" is full of false claims and accusations unsupported by evidence we will pass on to consider other areas of misunderstanding. (We have mentioned this book and its author as an example, so that the world may know how ignorant the masses must be if the 'ulema' and authors of the majority community are as we have described.)
The difficulty is that those who write about the Shi'as, take such unlikely authors as ibn Khaldun and Ahmad ibn 'Abdi Rabbih Andalusi as their source. Moreover the persent dsay writers in their show of liberality regard Professor Wellhausen and Professor Dozy as authorities. But no one takes the trouble of referring to the scholarly works of the Shi'as. The result is that when a Shi'a goes through the books of these scholars he finds in them the same sort of absurdities about himself to which Raghib Isfahani has referred to in his book "al-Muhadhirat". The author writes: "In the court of Ja'far ibn Sulayman a Muslim was giving evidence about someone's infidelity. When he was asked what he knew about the defendant, he said, "This man is Mu'tazili; he is Nasibi; he is Harwari; he is Jabri; he is Rafzi; he rails at 'Ali ibn Khattab, 'Umar ibn Abi Qahafah, 'Uthman ibn Abi Talib, and Abu Bakr ibn 'Affan. Also he abuses Hajjaj, who pulled down Kufah on Abu Sufyan, and on the day of Qata'if (the day of Tafur 'Ashura') fought against Husayn ibn Mu'awiyah". Hearing this Ja'far said, "Damn you! I do not know for which branch of learning I should envy you -historical, religious or georgraphical knowldege!"
As regards 'Abdullah ibn Saba, whose name has been
Our original aim was to dwell on this subject. But considering the repeated attacks on the authors of the present age, we thought it necessary to introduce briefly the beliefs and faiths, important principles and the articles of practice of the Shi'as. It should be noted that in the Shi'a religion the door of "Ijtihad" (endeavor to arrive at a conclusion regarding any religious problem) is always open, and so long as there is no violation of "ijma" (concensus), the Book (the Holy Quran), sunnah, and intellectual reasoning, every "mujtahid" (religious scholar of exceptional merit) is free in his opinion; anyone who violates these limits and draws his own conclusion will be considered misguided; the opinion of such a man will be regarded as purely personal, individual and unfit to be followed.
In these pages it is not possible to deal with all matters in detail, so only those fundamentals of Shi'ism will be explained in which there is no room for disagreement. Not much attention will be paid to arguments and proofs as this is appropriate only for larger volumes. Our only
Muhammad Husayn
Al-Kashifi 'l-Ghita'
Najaf al-Ashraf
Jamadi 'l-awwal 1350 A.H.
(1931 A.D.)
