DID IMAM ALI (ع) GO AGAINST THE PROPHET?

_________________________________________

Questions

_________________________________________

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master Muhammad and his pure and immaculate family and may Allah's curse be upon all their enemies.

Response from the Office:

Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you.

_________________________________________

Response to Question 1:

_________________________________________

The Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah includes what is permissible and what is forbidden. All of this is called "Sunnah," meaning what the Prophet established and legislated in terms of rulings. However, in common usage, "Sunnah" is predominantly associated with what is recommended, but this is not the meaning of Sunnah in the terminology of Islamic law.

Permissibility is divided into three categories: permissible, recommended, and disliked.

To forbid something permissible upon oneself in a linguistic (non-legislative) sense is not a deficiency; rather, it is evidence of high resolve and strong willpower.

However, it becomes an innovation [bid’ah] if someone obliges it upon themselves while claiming that it is legislated, i.e., asserting that it is from Islamic law and that Allah has ordained it.

The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, forbade a permissible act upon himself in a linguistic sense, not in a legislative sense, and Allah revealed verses that appear outwardly as a reproach:

يا أيها النبي لمَ تُحرم ما أحل الله لك

“O Prophet, why do you forbid [yourself] what Allah has made lawful for you?” [5]

This Quranic address to the Prophet appears outwardly as a reproach, but inwardly, it portrays the severity of the crime committed by Aisha and Hafsa, may Allah curse them both, for their harm toward the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, to the extent that he was forced to forbid himself from something lawful.

In any case, what Allah revealed was out of mercy and compassion, and the Prophet, by refraining from what is permissible, did not commit anything prohibited or disliked.

This response is based on the assumption that the narration you cited from Tafsir al-Qummi is authentic. According to this narration, Imam Ali, peace be upon him, refrained from a permissible act, which was sleeping at night, and instead engaged in worship. [6] [7] However, the narration is questionable in terms of its authenticity, as will be explained, Allah willing.

Turning away from something (رغبة عن الشيء) is the opposite of desiring it (رغبة في الشيء). Turning away means abandoning or shunning something. Therefore, the question arises: Did Salman, Uthman, and Ali refrain from permissible acts because they intended to turn away from emulating the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family?

Before the Prophet came out and forbade them from such abstinence, did they act with the intention of shunning the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah? Absolutely not. Their intention was nearness to Allah Almighty.

Thus, the statement “Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not of me” was made by the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, after informing them that he performed the very acts they were abstaining from. The use of "فمن" (then whoever) in this context implies a consequential warning, meaning that after this admonishment, anyone who turns away from sleeping at night, marrying, or breaking their fast during the day is not of me.

This strong emphasis by the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, in obligating them to desist from abstaining from permissible acts in this manner was an act of mercy and compassion toward them.

This is the explanation if we accept the narration in its apparent form regarding the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, without dismissing it based on the principle of opposition [قاعدة المخالفة] mentioned by our Imams, peace be upon them.

This principle involves scepticism about narrations originating from your [Sunni] sources. Since you consider such narrations as evidence against infallibility, we reject this narration and adhere to the other set of evidence.

The narrations with this content are highly inconsistent. Sometimes they specify only Uthman bin Maz’un, other times they include Ali and Bilal, and yet other times they mention a group of companions without specifying anyone, stating that they did such and such.

What further raises doubts about the validity of the disconnected narration in Tafsir al-Qummi is that in another instance, it is attributed to Ali bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him) himself, which indicates that he is not the subject of the incident.

Ali bin al-Husayn al-Murtada mentioned in his treatise Al-Muhkam wa al-Mutashabih, quoting from Tafsir al-Numani with its chain of transmission to Ali, peace be upon him, that he said:

إن جماعة من الصحابة كانوا حرموا على أنفسهم النساء والافطار بالنهار والنوم بالليل فأخبرت أم سلمة رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) فخرج إلى أصحابه فقال : أترغبون عن النساء ؟ ! إني آتي النساء وآكل بالنهار ، وأنام بالليل ، فمن رغب عن سنتي فليس منى ، وأنزل الله ( لا تحرموا طيبات ما أحل الله لكم ولا تعتدوا انه لا يحب المعتدين * وكلوا مما رزقكم الله حلالا طيبا واتقوا الله الذي أنتم به مؤمنون ) فقالوا : يا رسول الله انا قد حلفنا على ذلك ؟ فأنزل الله : ( لا يؤاخذكم الله باللغو في أيمانكم - إلى قوله - ذلك كفارة أيمانكم إذا حلفتم واحفظوا أيمانكم

"A group of companions prohibited themselves from women, fasting during the day, and sleeping at night. Umm Salama informed the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), and he went out to his companions and said: 'Do you turn away from women? I approach women, eat during the day, and sleep at night. Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not of me.' Then Allah revealed: 'Do not forbid the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, and do not transgress; surely Allah does not love the transgressors. And eat of what Allah has provided for you of lawful and good things, and fear Allah in whom you are believers' [The Holy Qur'an 5:87-88]. [8]

On another level, we can fundamentally dismiss all the narrations with this content found in our sources based on the principle of contradiction [قاعدة التعارض], as we have another narration regarding the reason for the revelation of this verse with a different context.

This alternate narration does not criticize the Commander of the Faithful or describe him as having turned away from the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family.

Imam Hasan, peace be upon him, referred to the incident involving the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) in a context of pride and praise. In a discussion with Mu'awiya and his companions, he said:

أنشدكم بالله أتعلمون أنّ عليّا اوّل من حرم الشهوات على نفسه من أصحاب رسول الله صلّى الله عليه وآله، فانزل الله تعالى: ( يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا تحرموا طيبات ما أحل الله لكم

"I ask you by Allah, do you know that Ali was the first among the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) to forbid himself from desires? Then Allah revealed: 'O you who have believed, do not prohibit the good things which Allah has made lawful for you' [The Holy Qur'an] 5:87)." [9]

But, since this set of narrations aligns with what is found in your [Sunni] sources, we are commanded to reject them based on the principle of opposition:

ما خالف العامة ففيه الرشاد

“Whatever contradicts the general public [the Sunnis] contains guidance.” [10]

If you consider this verse as a criticism of Ali (peace be upon him) and a proof against his infallibility, then by the same reasoning, you must consider the verse: “O Prophet, why do you forbid [yourself] what Allah has made lawful for you?” (Quran 66:1) [11] as a proof against the infallibility of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family)—God forbid! Would you dare to do so?

In general, the Sheikh [Yasir Al-Habib], in his theological lessons and lectures, clarified that what has been reported regarding this type of hadiths and narrations, even if accepted for the sake of argument, does not undermine the infallibility of the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him.

Similarly, the verses of the Holy Quran that outwardly appear as God’s reproach to His prophets, peace be upon them, do not undermine their infallibility.

This is because divine wisdom dictates that prophets and divinely appointed successors deliberately perform certain actions or refrain from others in a manner that necessitates the revelation of rulings or the clarification of concepts for the people.

These rulings and concepts cannot become firmly ingrained in the hearts of people across generations without such deliberate actions or omissions by the infallibles, which serve as a basis for divine, prophetic, or infallible clarification.

This does not mean that the infallible has violated a divine command—God forbid. Rather, it means that they created the opportunity for clarification and explanation.

_________________________________________

The answer and explanation to the second question

_________________________________________

The answer to the second question: The sons of the Bakri sect, with their foolishness, aim to depict this as a "flaw," while in reality, it is a "virtue" for the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him), as will become evident to you.

- The Sheikh al-Habib has previously answered your question. [12]

With another phrase, we add to the previous detailed explanation by stating that the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him,  was not disobedient—God forbid—in this situation.

It was not [in reality] permissible for him to alter the title of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family.

The command issued by the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, was not a legislative command [أمر مولوي], but rather an illustrative command [أمر التصويري]—and this becomes clear in the narration if the opponents read it in its entirety.

If what happened with the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, had been a sin, the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, would have indicated that, as he did with Umar and those who disobeyed the command of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, such as when he turned away from them and expelled them during the incident of Thursday, for example.

Here is a passage found in the books of the innovators [the so called Sunnis] and the books of the Rafidah [the Shi'a]:

عندما رفض المشركون كتابة "محمد رسول الله" , فقال المشركون: لا تكتب محمد رسول الله؛ لو كنت رسولاً لم نقاتلك. فقال لعلي: "إمحه". فقال علي: ما أنا بالذي أمحاه. فمحاه رسول الله بيده

When the polytheists rejected writing "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," they said, "Do not write Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; if you were a messenger, we would not fight you." The Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, then said to Ali, "Erase it." Ali replied, "I am not the one to erase it." So the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, erased it with his own hand. [13]

Pay attention to the words of the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him: "I am not the one to erase it. What he meant by this statement is: "I would never do this, O Messenger of Allah, but rather, you should do it yourself." The Commander of the Faithful, Ali (peace be upon him), did not "prevent" the Messenger of Allah from erasing the name, nor did he object to the very idea of erasing the name, as in the case of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, where Umar, may Allah curse him, completely rejected it, both in essence and in every aspect!

The Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, did not reject the "act" itself but instead expressed his deep reverence for the Messenger of Allah and his awareness of the sanctity of the Prophet by saying a phrase that implied, "I would never do such a thing, O Messenger of Allah; if it must be done, you, O Messenger of Allah, are the one who should do it." If the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, had repeated the command in the form of an "[legislative] order", Ali (peace be upon him) would have carried it out.

An example of this would be: if you were in the company of a dignified and eloquent speaker, and he asked you to ascend the podium, even though you are capable of speaking and ascending the podium yourself, out of respect and reverence for him, you would say, "No, I will not ascend or do so in your presence, nor will I take precedence over you.

Thus, the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, did not object to the "act" itself or the core of the "issue of erasing the name." The proof of this is that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, erased his name with his own blessed hand, and Ali, peace be upon him, did not object to it nor prevent it. In contrast, Umar, may Allah curse him, objected to the very idea of writing the document from the beginning and prevented its writing altogether. There is a clear difference between these two positions and issues! [14]

The followers of the Bakri sect, in reality, need intensive lessons in logic, as they lack an innate ability to think logically.

In our books, as Shia, we find similar narrations to those reported in the sources of the innovators:

امح يا علي واكتب محمد بن عبد الله. فقال أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: ما أمحو اسمك من النبوة أبداً فمحاه رسول الله بيده

"Erase it, O Ali, and write Muhammad ibn Abdullah." The Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him) replied, "I will never remove your name from the title of prophethood." Then the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family, erased it with his own hand. [15] [16] [17] [18]

Peace be upon our master, the Commander of the Faithful, the master of the successors, peace be upon him, for he truly understood the rights and status of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him and his family.

So, as you can see, this was an illustrative moment in which the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family,  intended to show the people how much Ali, peace be upon him, knew the rights of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, and revered him, so that they would recognize Ali's, peace be upon him, right and not precede him.

In the end, what the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his family,  intended came to pass, and Ali, peace be upon him, did not prevent him from what he wished.

We are truly amazed and we question the kind of minds the Bakri sect possesses!

Finally, let us read the narration of Al-Majlisi to clearly understand the truth of this incident.

It is reported in Bihar al-Anwar, Volume 20, Page, 359, where Suhayl said:

إكتب اسمه يمضي الشرط ، فقال له أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام : ويلك يا سهيل كف عن عنادك ، فقال له النبي صلى الله عليه وآله : " إمحها يا علي " : فقال يا رسول الله إن يدي "لا تنطلق" بمحو اسمك من النبوة ، قال له : " فضع يدي عليها " , "فمحاها" رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله بيده.

"Write his name, and the condition will be fulfilled." Then the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, said: "Woe to you, Suhayl, stop your obstinacy." The Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, then said: "Erase it, O Ali." Ali, peace be upon him, replied: "O Messenger of Allah, my hand cannot erase your name from prophethood." and he said to him: place your hand on mine." And the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, erased it with his hand. [19]

May our souls be sacrificed for you, O Abu al-Hasan and Abu al-Husayn. Your hand, O Commander of the Faithful, cannot erase the name of the Messenger of Allah, while others [like Umar] dare to say in the face of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family), "The man is speaking nonsense," [20] and rebel against the command of the Prophet, preventing him from writing his will.

Peace be upon you, our master, our chief, and our Imam, O Commander of the Faithful and Master of the Successors. The hand of the Messenger of Allah on your hand, O Commander of the Faithful, may the souls of all the worlds be sacrificed for you both.

To claim that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, was illiterate and did not know where to place the words, based on their misguided understanding of this narration, reflects the shallow minds of the Bakri sect and their corrupted hearts.

Pay close attention to the narration of Al-Majlisi to understand the flawed reasoning of the people [i.e the Sunnis].

The Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, intentionally did this to emphasize the unity between prophethood and imamate. If the situation were as they claimed, the Prophet would have said to Ali, peace be upon him, "Point to where my name is in the text so I can erase it." The Prophet would have erased his name with his own hand alone, or Ali (peace be upon him) would have placed his hand on the Prophet’s hand, not the other way around!

They seek to undermine this virtue of Ali, peace be upon him, and discard it at any cost. When they found no other way to discredit it, they resorted to rejecting it by claiming it implies that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family,  was illiterate, while the Shia deny the illiteracy of the Prophet. Hence, they must deny such a narrative!

May Allah grant you success in seeking His pleasure.

References

[1] The Holy Qur'an 5:87

[2] The Holy Qur'an 5:89

[3] Tafsir Al-Qummi, Ali ibn Ibrahim Al-Qummi, Volume 1, Page 179-180

[4] Tafsir Al-Qummi, Ali ibn Ibrahim Al-Qummi, Volume 1, Page 180

[5] The Holy Qur'an 66:1

[6] [7] The Holy Quran does not forbid those who sleep a little at night to worship Allah, the Almighty. On the contrary, the Holy Quran praises those with the following words:

كَانُوا قَلِيلًا مِنَ اللَّيْلِ مَا يَهْجَعُونَ

وَبِالْأَسْحَارِ هُمْ يَسْتَغْفِرُونَ

'They used to sleep a little during the night,

and at dawns they would plead for forgiveness,'

[The Holy Qur'an 51:17-18]

[8] Wasa'il al-Shi'ah [Ahl al-Bayt], Shaykh Al-Hurr Al-‘Amili, Volume: 20, Page: 21

[9] Al-Ihtijaj, Abu Mansour  At-Tabarsi, Volume: 1, Page: 407

[10] Kitab Al-Kafi, Shaykh Al-Kulayni, Volume 1, Chapter 21, Book 2, Hadith 10

Shaykh Al-Kulani has narrated the following: 

10ـ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحُسَيْنِ عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيسَى عَنْ صَفْوَانَ بْنِ يَحْيَى عَنْ دَاوُدَ بْنِ الْحُصَيْنِ عَنْ عُمَرَ بْنِ حَنْظَلَةَ قَالَ سَأَلْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ الله عليه السلام عَنْ رَجُلَيْنِ مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا بَيْنَهُمَا مُنَازَعَةٌ فِي دَيْنٍ أَوْ مِيرَاثٍ فَتَحَاكَمَا إِلَى السُّلْطَانِ وَإِلَى الْقُضَاةِ أَ يَحِلُّ ذَلِكَ قَالَ مَنْ تَحَاكَمَ إِلَيْهِمْ فِي حَقٍّ أَوْ بَاطِلٍ فَإِنَّمَا تَحَاكَمَ إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَمَا يَحْكُمُ لَهُ فَإِنَّمَا يَأْخُذُ سُحْتاً وَإِنْ كَانَ حَقّاً ثَابِتاً لانَّهُ أَخَذَهُ بِحُكْمِ الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أَمَرَ الله أَنْ يُكْفَرَ بِهِ قَالَ الله تَعَالَى يُرِيدُونَ أَنْ يَتَحاكَمُوا إِلَى الطَّاغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوا أَنْ يَكْفُرُوا بِهِ قُلْتُ فَكَيْفَ يَصْنَعَانِ قَالَ يَنْظُرَانِ إِلَى مَنْ كَانَ مِنْكُمْ مِمَّنْ قَدْ رَوَى حَدِيثَنَا وَنَظَرَ فِي حَلالِنَا وَحَرَامِنَا وَعَرَفَ أَحْكَامَنَا فَلْيَرْضَوْا بِهِ حَكَماً فَإِنِّي قَدْ جَعَلْتُهُ عَلَيْكُمْ حَاكِماً فَإِذَا حَكَمَ بِحُكْمِنَا فَلَمْ يَقْبَلْهُ مِنْهُ فَإِنَّمَا اسْتَخَفَّ بِحُكْمِ الله وَعَلَيْنَا رَدَّ وَالرَّادُّ عَلَيْنَا الرَّادُّ عَلَى الله وَهُوَ عَلَى حَدِّ الشِّرْكِ بِالله قُلْتُ فَإِنْ كَانَ كُلُّ رَجُلٍ اخْتَارَ رَجُلاً مِنْ أَصْحَابِنَا فَرَضِيَا أَنْ يَكُونَا النَّاظِرَيْنِ فِي حَقِّهِمَا وَاخْتَلَفَا فِيمَا حَكَمَا وَكِلاهُمَا اخْتَلَفَا فِي حَدِيثِكُمْ قَالَ الْحُكْمُ مَا حَكَمَ بِهِ أَعْدَلُهُمَا وَأَفْقَهُهُمَا وَأَصْدَقُهُمَا فِي الْحَدِيثِ وَأَوْرَعُهُمَا وَلا يَلْتَفِتْ إِلَى مَا يَحْكُمُ بِهِ الاخَرُ قَالَ قُلْتُ فَإِنَّهُمَا عَدْلانِ مَرْضِيَّانِ عِنْدَ أَصْحَابِنَا لا يُفَضَّلُ وَاحِدٌ مِنْهُمَا عَلَى الاخَرِ قَالَ فَقَالَ يُنْظَرُ إِلَى مَا كَانَ مِنْ رِوَايَتِهِمْ عَنَّا فِي ذَلِكَ الَّذِي حَكَمَا بِهِ الْمُجْمَعُ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَصْحَابِكَ فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِ مِنْ حُكْمِنَا وَيُتْرَكُ الشَّاذُّ الَّذِي لَيْسَ بِمَشْهُورٍ عِنْدَ أَصْحَابِكَ فَإِنَّ الْمُجْمَعَ عَلَيْهِ لا رَيْبَ فِيهِ وَإِنَّمَا الامُورُ ثَلاثَةٌ أَمْرٌ بَيِّنٌ رُشْدُهُ فَيُتَّبَعُ وَأَمْرٌ بَيِّنٌ غَيُّهُ فَيُجْتَنَبُ وَأَمْرٌ مُشْكِلٌ يُرَدُّ عِلْمُهُ إِلَى الله وَإِلَى رَسُولِهِ قَالَ رَسُولُ الله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله حَلالٌ بَيِّنٌ وَحَرَامٌ بَيِّنٌ وَشُبُهَاتٌ بَيْنَ ذَلِكَ فَمَنْ تَرَكَ الشُّبُهَاتِ نَجَا مِنَ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ وَمَنْ أَخَذَ بِالشُّبُهَاتِ ارْتَكَبَ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ وَهَلَكَ مِنْ حَيْثُ لا يَعْلَمُ قُلْتُ فَإِنْ كَانَ الْخَبَرَانِ عَنْكُمَا مَشْهُورَيْنِ قَدْ رَوَاهُمَا الثِّقَاتُ عَنْكُمْ قَالَ يُنْظَرُ فَمَا وَافَقَ حُكْمُهُ حُكْمَ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ وَخَالَفَ الْعَامَّةَ فَيُؤْخَذُ بِهِ وَيُتْرَكُ مَا خَالَفَ حُكْمُهُ حُكْمَ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ وَوَافَقَ الْعَامَّةَ قُلْتُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ أَ رَأَيْتَ إِنْ كَانَ الْفَقِيهَانِ عَرَفَا حُكْمَهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ وَوَجَدْنَا أَحَدَ الْخَبَرَيْنِ مُوَافِقاً لِلْعَامَّةِ وَالاخَرَ مُخَالِفاً لَهُمْ بِأَيِّ الْخَبَرَيْنِ يُؤْخَذُ قَالَ مَا خَالَفَ الْعَامَّةَ فَفِيهِ الرَّشَادُ فَقُلْتُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ فَإِنْ وَافَقَهُمَا الْخَبَرَانِ جَمِيعاً قَالَ يُنْظَرُ إِلَى مَا هُمْ إِلَيْهِ أَمْيَلُ حُكَّامُهُمْ وَقُضَاتُهُمْ فَيُتْرَكُ وَيُؤْخَذُ بِالاخَرِ قُلْتُ فَإِنْ وَافَقَ حُكَّامُهُمُ الْخَبَرَيْنِ جَمِيعاً قَالَ إِذَا كَانَ ذَلِكَ فَأَرْجِهْ حَتَّى تَلْقَى إِمَامَكَ فَإِنَّ الْوُقُوفَ عِنْدَ الشُّبُهَاتِ خَيْرٌ مِنَ الاقْتِحَامِ فِي الْهَلَكَاتِ.

10. Muhammad bin Yahya has narrated from Muhammad bin al-Husayn from Muhammad bin ‘Isa from Safwan bin Yahya from Dawud bin al-Husayn from ‘Umar bin Hanzala who has said the following:

“I asked Imam Abu ‘Abdallah, peace be upon him, about the two people with a dispute between them on the issue of debts or inheritance and they go to the king or the judges for a decision is it permissible to seek such decisions?”

The Imam replied, “Whoever would go to them for a judgement in a right or wrongful matter it is like seeking the judgment of the devil. Anything received through such judgment would like consuming filth even if it would one’s established right. It is because of receiving through the judgment of the devil and Allah has commanded to reject the devil, “yet choose to take their affairs to Satan for judgment even though they are commanded to deny him. Satan wants to lead them far away from the right path. (4:60)”

I said, “What should then they do?”

The Imam replied, “They must look for one among you who have narrated our Hadith and have studied what is lawful and unlawful in our teachings and have learned our laws they must agree to settle their dispute according to his judgment because I have made him over you a judge. When he may judge according to our commands and then it is not accepted from him the dissenting this judgment has ignored the commands of Allah and it is rejection of us. Rejecting us is rejecting Allah and that is up to the level of paganism and considering things equal to Allah.”

I said, “What if each one of such disputing parties would chose a man from among our people and agree to accept their judgment but these two man would come up with different judgments and they would have differences in your Hadith?”

The Imam replied, “The judgment will be the judgment of the one who has a more just, having more better understanding of the law, Fiqh, the more truthful in Hadith and the more pious of the two. The judgment of the other one will be disregarded.”

I said, “What if both (of such judges) would be just and accepted among our people and none of them would have been any preference over the other?”

The Imam replied, “One must consider and study the hadith that each one of them would narrate from us as to which has received the acceptance of all of your people. Such Hadith must be followed and the one, which rarely accepted and is not popular in your people, must be disregarded because the one popularly accepted is free of doubts. The nature of cases are of three kinds: (a) A case that is a well-known and true to follow. (b) A case that is well known to be false to stay away from. (c) And a confusing case the knowledge of which must be left to Allah and His Prophet for an answer. The holy Prophet has said, ‘There is the clearly lawful and the clearly unlawful and the confusing cases. One who stays away from the confusing ones he has protected himself against the unlawful ones. Those who follow the confusing matters they indulge in unlawful matters and will be destroyed unexpectedly.”

I said, “What if both Hadith from you would be popular and narrated by the trustworthy people from you?”

The Imam replied, “One must study to find out which one agrees with the laws of the Quran and the Sunnah and it does not agree with the laws of those who oppose us. Such Hadith must be accepted and the one that disagrees with the laws of the Quran and the Sunnah and coincides the masses must be disregarded.”

I said, “May Allah take my soul in the service of your cause, What if both Faqih, scholars of the law would have deduced and learned their judgment from the book and the Sunnah and found that one of the Hadith agrees with the masses and the other disagrees with the masses which one must be followed?”

The Imam replied, “The one which disagrees with the masses must be followed because in it there is guidance.”

I said, “May Allah take my soul in the service of your cause, what if both Hadith would agree with the masses?”

The Imam replied, “One must study to find out of the two the one that is more agreeable to their rulers and judges must be disregarded and the other must be followed.”

I said, “What if both Hadith would agree with their rulers?”

The Imam replied, “If such would be the case it must be suspended until you meet your Imam. Restraint in confusing cases is better than indulging in destruction.”

[Kitab Al-Kafi, Shaykh Al-Kulayni, Volume 1, Chapter 21, Book 2, Hadith 10]

[11] The Holy Qur'an 66:1

[12] Did Imam Ali (ع) disobey the Messenger of Allah (ص) in the treaty of Al-Hudaybiyyah?, the Office of Shaykh Yasir Al-Habib, London, June 25, 2009 (2 Jumada al-Akhira 1430 AH)

[13] Fath Al-Bari, Ibn Hajar Al-'Asqalani, Volume 5, Page 303

[14] Umar bin al-Khattab committed an act of significant gravity and profound danger on the Day of Hudaybiyyah, an event that remains indelibly marked in history. According to Sahih Ibn Hibban and other sources, Umar openly admitted at that moment that he doubted the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. He went so far as to challenge the Prophet's, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, statements, repeatedly questioning him.

The Prophet, perceiving that Umar's objections implied doubts about his Prophethood, continuously reassured him by saying, "I am the Messenger of Allah!" However, Umar was not convinced and began referencing previous statements of the Prophet regarding their anticipated circumambulation of the Kaaba, accusing the Prophet—God forbid—of misleading them.

According to the narrative, Umar said, "Then why are we accepting humiliation in our religion?"—as if suggesting, God forbid, that the Prophet had accepted humiliation in religion.

As Umar was frustrated, he turned to Abu Bakr, expressing anger at the Prophet himself, saying, "Is this not the Messenger of Allah?" Yet, even Abu Bakr's assurances did not satisfy him. Umar's dissatisfaction reached the point where he took active steps to annul the written peace treaty [the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah].

While the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his family, sought to establish peace through the treaty, Umar engaged in actions aimed at annulling it, thus directly opposing the Prophet's mission and act.

The Sunni Scholar Ibn Hibban has narrated the following in his Sahih Ibn Hibban:

فَقَالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ رِضْوَانُ اللهِ عَلَيْهِ: وَاللهِ مَا شَكَكْتُ مُنْذُ أَسْلَمْتُ إِلَاّ يَوْمَئِذٍ، فَأَتَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلى الله عَلَيه وسَلم فَقُلْتُ: أَلَسْتَ رَسُولَ اللهِ حَقًّا؟ قَالَ: "بَلَى"، قُلْتُ: أَلَسْنَا عَلَى الْحَقِّ وَعَدُوُّنَا عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ؟ قَالَ: "بَلَى"، قُلْتُ: فَلِمَ نُعْطِي الدَّنِيَّةَ فِي دِينِنَا إِذًا؟ قَالَ: "إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللهِ، وَلَسْتُ أَعْصِي رَبِّي، وَهُوَ نَاصِرِيّ"، قُلْتُ: أَوَلَيْسَ كُنْتَ تُحَدِّثُنَا أَنَّا سَنَأْتِي الْبَيْتَ فَنَطُوفُ بِهِ؟ قَالَ: "بَلَى، أَفَأَخْبَرْتُكَ أَنَّكَ تَأْتِيهِ الْعَامَ؟ " قَالَ: لَا، قَالَ: "فَإِنَّكَ تَأْتِيهِ فَتَطُوفُ بِهِ"، قَالَ: فَأَتَيْتُ أَبَا بَكْرٍ الصِّدِّيقَ رِضْوَانُ اللهِ عَلَيْهِ، فَقُلْتُ: يَا أَبَا بَكْرٍ، أَلَيْسَ هَذَا نَبِيَّ اللهِ حَقًّا؟ قَالَ: بَلَى، قُلْتُ: أَوَلَسْنَا عَلَى الْحَقِّ وَعَدُوُّنَا عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ؟ قَالَ: بَلَى، قُلْتُ: فَلِمَ نُعْطِي الدَّنِيَّةَ فِي دِينِنَا إِذًا؟ قَالَ: أَيُّهَا الرَّجُلُ، إِنَّهُ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلى الله عَلَيه وسَلم وَلَيْسَ يَعْصِي رَبَّهُ، وَهُوَ نَاصِرُهُ، فَاسْتَمْسِكْ بِغَرْزِهِ حَتَّى تَمُوتَ، فَوَاللهِ إِنَّهُ عَلَى الْحَقِّ، قُلْتُ: أَوَلَيْسَ كَانَ يُحَدِّثُنَا أَنَّا سَنَأْتِي الْبَيْتَ وَنَطُوفُ بِهِ؟ قَالَ: بَلَى، قَالَ: فَأَخْبَرَكَ أَنَّكَ تَأْتِيهِ الْعَامَ؟ قُلْتُ: لَا، قَالَ: فَإِنَّكَ آتِيهِ وَتَطُوفُ بِهِ. قَالَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ رِضْوَانُ اللهِ عَلَيْهِ: فَعَمِلْتُ فِي ذَلِكَ أَعْمَالاً، يَعْنِي فِي نَقْضِ الصَّحِيفَةِ

Umar bin Al-Khattab said: "By Allah, I never doubted since I embraced Islam except on that day. I went to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and I asked, 'Are you not truly the Messenger of Allah?' He said, 'Indeed, I am!' I said, 'Are we not on the truth while our enemy is on falsehood?' He said, 'Indeed, we are!' I said, 'Then why are we accepting humiliation in our religion?' He replied, 'I am the Messenger of Allah, and I do not disobey my Lord, and He will help me.'

I said, 'Did you not tell us that we would come to the House (the Ka'aba) and perform tawaf around it?' He said, 'Indeed, I did, but did I tell you that you would come to it this year?' I replied, 'No.' He said, 'Then you will come to it and perform tawaf around it.'

I then went to Abu Bakr and said, 'O Abu Bakr, is this not truly the Messenger of Allah?' He said, 'Indeed, he is!' I asked, 'Are we not on the truth while our enemy is on falsehood?' He said, 'Indeed, we are!' I said, 'Then why are we accepting humiliation in our religion?'

Abu Bakr replied, 'O man, he is the Messenger of Allah! He does not disobey his Lord, and He will help him. Hold firmly to his leadership until you die, for by Allah, he is upon the truth.'

I asked, 'Did he not tell us that we would come to the House and perform tawaf around it?' He said, 'Indeed, he did, but did he tell you that you would come this year?' I replied, 'No.' He said, 'Then you will come to it and perform tawaf around it.'

Umar bin al-Khattab then said, 'So I took action to annul the treaty,' referring to the efforts to annul the written treaty [of Hudaybiyyah]."

[Sahih Ibn Hibban, Ibn Hibban, Volume 7, Page 99-100]

Muhammad Al-Bukhari in his Sahih Al-Bukhari and Muslim bin Hajjaj in his Sahih Muslim, have used censorship regarding the narrative, and the part where Umar doubts Islam has been removed. 

[15] 'I'lam Al-Wara bi A'lam Al-Huda , Al-Shaykh al-Ṭabarsī, Volume: 1, Page 373

[16] Al-Irshād, Shaykh Al-Mufīd, Volume: 1, Page 120-121

[17] Bihar Al-Anwar, ʿAllamah Al-Majlisi, Volume: 20, Page: 359

[18] Tafsir Al-Qummi, Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummi, Volume 2, Page 313

[19] Bihar Al-Anwar, Allamah Al-Majlisi, Volume 20, Page 359

[20] Minhaj As-Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyyah, Volume 6, Page 24

The Sunni Scholar Ibn Taymiyyah has said the following:

وَأَمَّا عُمَرُ فَاشْتَبَهَ عَلَيْهِ هَلْ كَانَ قَوْلُ النَّبِيِّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - مِنْ شِدَّةِ الْمَرَضِ، أَوْ كَانَ مِنْ أَقْوَالِهِ الْمَعْرُوفَةِ؟ وَالْمَرَضُ جَائِزٌ عَلَى الْأَنْبِيَاءِ، وَلِهَذَا قَالَ: " مَا لَهُ؟ أَهَجَرَ ؟ " فَشَكَّ فِي ذَلِكَ وَلَمْ يَجْزِمْ بِأَنَّهُ هَجَرَ، وَالشَّكُّ جَائِزٌ عَلَى عُمَرَ، فَإِنَّهُ لَا مَعْصُومَ إِلَّا النَّبِيَّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - لَا سِيَّمَا وَقَدْ شَكَّ بِشُبْهَةٍ؛ فَإِنَّ النَّبِيَّ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - كَانَ مَرِيضًا، فَلَمْ يَدْرِ أَكَلَامُهُ كَانَ مِنْ وَهَجِ الْمَرَضِ، كَمَا يَعْرِضُ لِلْمَرِيضِ، أَوْ كَانَ مِنْ كَلَامِهِ الْمَعْرُوفِ الَّذِي يَجِبُ قَبُولُهُ؟ وَكَذَلِكَ . ظَنَّ أَنَّهُ لَمْ يَمُتْ حَتَّى تَبَيَّنَ أَنَّهُ قَدْ مَاتَ

"As for Umar, was he uncertain whether the words of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, were due to the severity of his illness or were among his well-known statements? Illness is possible for the Prophets, and this is why he [Umar] said: 'What is wrong with him? Is he delirious?' Thus, he doubted this and did not decisively conclude that the Prophet was delirious. Doubt is permissible for Umar, as he is not infallible except for the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, especially since his doubt arose due to a plausible reason. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, was ill, and Umar did not know whether his words were due to the effects of illness, as can happen to the sick, or whether they were among his recognized words that must be accepted. Similarly, he thought that the Prophet had not passed away until it became evident to him that he had indeed died."

[Minhaj As-Sunnah, Ibn Taymiyyah, Volume 6, Page 24]

﷽

_________________________________________

Answer

_________________________________________

Peace be upon you. To proceed:

Question 1: It has been narrated by Ali ibn Ibrahim in his [Tafsir] from his father, from Ibn Abi Umayr, from some of his men, from Abu Abdullah, peace be upon him, regarding the verse:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تُحَرِّمُوا طَيِّبَاتِ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ

“Do not forbid the good things which Allah has made lawful for you” [1]

He said: This verse was revealed about the Commander of the Faithful Ali, peace be upon him, Bilal, and Uthman bin Maz’oon.

As for the Commander of the Faithful (peace be upon him), he swore that he would not sleep at night.

As for Bilal, he swore that he would not break his fast during the day.

As for Uthman bin Maz’oon, he swore that he would not marry.

Until, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) came out, called for prayer, and ascended the pulpit. He praised Allah and glorified Him, then said:

ما بال أقوام يحرمون على أنفسهم الطيبات ألا إنيّ انام الليل، وأنكح، وافطر بالنهار، فمن رغب عن سنّتي فليس منّي

“What is the matter with people who forbid upon themselves the good things? Indeed, I sleep at night, I have intimate relations [with my wives], and I break my fast during the day. Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not from me.”

These individuals stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family), we have taken oaths regarding this.”

So Allah revealed:

لَا يُؤَاخِذُكُمُ اللَّهُ بِاللَّغْوِ فِي أَيْمَانِكُمْ وَلَٰكِن يُؤَاخِذُكُم بِمَا عَقَّدتُّمُ الْأَيْمَانَ ۖ فَكَفَّارَتُهُ إِطْعَامُ عَشَرَةِ مَسَاكِينَ مِنْ أَوْسَطِ مَا تُطْعِمُونَ أَهْلِيكُمْ أَوْ كِسْوَتُهُمْ أَوْ تَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ ۖ فَمَن لَّمْ يَجِدْ فَصِيَامُ ثَلَاثَةِ أَيَّامٍ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ كَفَّارَةُ أَيْمَانِكُمْ إِذَا حَلَفْتُمْ

'Allah shall not take you to task for what is frivolous in your oaths; but He shall take you to task for what you pledge in earnest. The atonement for it is to feed ten needy persons with the average food you give to your families, or their clothing, or the freeing of a slave. He who cannot afford [any of these] shall fast for three days. That is the atonement for your oaths when you vow..' [2] [3]

Question 1:

Imam Ali contradicted the Sunnah, which proves he was not infallible, since the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

فمن رغب عن سنتي فليس مني

“Whoever turns away from my Sunnah is not from me.” [4]

Al-Majlisi included this incident under the chapter on monasticism and called it a bid’ah [innovation], which, as you know, is forbidden.
What is your response, O Sheikh of the Rafidah? I believe you’ll end up in a tight spot here.

Question 2:

During the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said to Ali, commanding him:

امحها يا علي، امح كلمة رسول الله

“Erase it, O Ali, erase the words ‘Messenger of Allah.’”

Ali said:

امحها!! لا والله لا أمحوها.

“Erase it! By Allah, I will not erase it.”

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) repeated:

امحها يا علي

“Erase it, O Ali.”

Ali said:

لا والله لا أمحوها

“By Allah, I will not erase it.”

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

امحها يا علي

“Erase it, O Ali.”

Ali replied:

لا والله لا أمحوها

“By Allah, I will not erase it.”

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) then asked:

أين موضعها؟

“Where is it located?”

Ali pointed it out, and the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, being unable to read, erased it himself.

So, the question is: Why did Ali contradict the Prophet’s command, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him?

Do you not claim that the speech of Ali is the speech of the Prophet, and the speech of the Prophet is the speech of Allah?

Then why did he contradict the Prophet, O Rafidi?

Answer me, and may Allah guide you.

Peace be upon you.

Abdullah