I do not understand why some of the narrations originating from Shia are included in some Sunni Works.
- Will you answer the following claims?
1. Alusi, who is a great scholar, writes in his tafsir that verse 5 of the chapter of al-Maida (5/67) was sent down so that the Prophet (pbuh) would declare Hz. Ali’s caliphate, which is a Shia claim.
2. Verse 3 of the chapter of al-Maida was revealed after the Ghadir Khum sermon (Imam Ghazali Ihya, Ibn Hanbal Musnad, the Suyuti tafsir, Manaqib Khawarizmi p. 25)
- Will you please answer those two questions?
Note: I read the answer on your site related to the question about 5/67 in the tafsir of al-Wahidi and Suyuti, but you did not write an answer about al-Wahidi; you just wrote that it was a work of Ahl as-Sunnah.
Submitted by on Tue, 25/01/2022 - 10:55
Dear Brother / Sister,
The verse in question is as follows:
“O Messenger. Proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief). For Allah guideth not those who reject Faith.” (al-Maida, 5/67)
- First of all, we see that there is a general command to proclaim the message rather than a specific issue in the verse. It is possible to understand it from the phrase “Proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord”. The sentence “And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief)” is also in accordance with that general meaning. If he had appointed Hz. Ali as the caliph, no one among the Muslims would have objected. Even the Qurayshi polytheists - due to tribal fanaticism - would have been pleased by the appointment of Hz. Ali, their relative, as the caliph.
The general expression of the verse prevents the issue from being related to only one person (Hz. Ali). As a matter of fact, according to Ibn Abbas, the meaning of the phrase “If thou didst not” in the verse is “If you hide a single verse from the Quran, it will be as if you did not convey the whole Quran”. (see Ibn Kathir, the interpretation of the verse in question)
What is meant by the sentence “And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief)”?
- According to the information given by tafsir scholars, they are Jews, Christians and polytheists because many of their faults are mentioned in the Qur'an, their mistakes are revealed, and their ideas and thoughts are criticized. If he had explained them, the Jews of Madinah, the Christian states and the polytheists of Mecca could have assassinated the Prophet (pbuh). As a matter of fact, several assassination attempts had been made since the first day of the prophethood. However, Allah protected him all the time. (cf. Tabari, Razi, the interpretation of the verse in question)
1. Alusi included the aforementioned narration from Shia along with various narrations. However, he stated that Shia made up many words and added them to the hadith “If I am someone’s mawla, Ali is his mawla too” based on their own desires. (Alusi, the interpretation of the verse in question)
Ismail b. Alusi quoted from the eulogy of a Shiite poet named Ismail b. Muhammad al-Himyari as an example and included his couplets showing that he criticized the Companions based on the information in “Ghadir Khum”. Alusi cursed that poet, who insulted the Companions with the claim that they allegedly usurped Ali's rights, by saying “May Allah not forgive the sins of that man who insulted the Companions!”, which shows clearly that he never approved of Shia.
Alusi also stated that the claim of “Shia's caliphate” was not accepted by Ahl as-Sunnah, and that many sound narrations regarding the issue supported Ahl as-Sunnah. (Alusi, ibid)
In addition, Alusi stated that the word “Mawla” indicated someone worthy of respect and love, not the caliph who managed the affairs. (see Alusi, ibid)
According to him, the fact that Bukhari and Muslim did not include the information in “Ghadir Khum” in their works shows that they do not regard that information to be in compliance with their own conditions of narration. (see ibid)
2. Suyuti gave the following information: The verse “al-yawma akmaltu” (al-Maida, 5/3) was revealed in Arafat. The Prophet (pbuh) died 81 days after that.” (see Suyuti, the interpretation of the verse in question)
Suyuti included more than ten narrations that this verse was revealed in Arafat. In another place, he included two more narrations stating that it was revealed in “Ghadir Khum” but he added the following note “Their chains of narrators are weak”. (see ibid)
Wahidi did not mention any relation of the verse with Hz. Ali. Like other tafsir scholars, he also pointed out that this verse generally mentioned proclaiming the revelation. (see al-Wajiz, the interpretation of the verse in question)
Ahmed b. Hanbal included many narrations on the issue in “Ghadir Khum” but they all have one thing in common: Emphasis on the hadith, “If I am someone's mawla, Ali is his mawla too.” There was no mention of the caliphate in any of them. Besides, statements other than this sentence are accepted as sound by scholars of Ahl as-Sunnah.
To sum up, different narrations are mentioned in all Sunni sources. However, as a result, none of them contains a decree showing that the claims of the Shia are true.
Questions on Islam
- Shiite say that the Prophet was informed about the caliphate of Hz. Ali in a place called Ghadir Khumm and that it was the order of Allah. What is the truth about this issue?
- What is the origin of Ghadir Khumm incident?
- Will you give information about Ghadir Khumm incident?
- Shia and their claims about Hz. Ali’s caliphate...
- What are the evidences of Shia for their claim that Hz. Ali should have been the first caliph and how can these claims be answered?
- Did Ali (ra) say that the Quran was distorted?
- Why are Shiites hostile to Sunnis?
- What are the proofs that Shia put forth about the claim that Hazrath Ali should have been the first caliph and how can these claims be answered?
- Who is Kabul-Ahbar (Ka'b al-Ahbar)?
- Was there a verse of stoning in the Quran? Whom did the Prophet Muhammad have stoned?