The Šīʿah also tried to argue that it is mutawātir from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم that ʿAlī رضي الله عنه is the best of the Ṣaħābah. The main ħadīþ they used for this claim is Ħadīþ aṭ-Ṭayr, since it is the closest one to being explicit while still being arguably reliable. They said that since ʿAlī رضي الله عنه is the best of the Ṣaħābah, and the ʾimām must be the most virtuous of his time, then ʿAlī رضي الله عنه must be the ʾimām after the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. The ħadīþ states that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was brought a roasted bird, and he then said:
(اللَّهُمَّ أَدْخِلْ عَلَيَّ أَحَبَّ خَلْقِكَ إِلَيْكَ يَأْكُلُ مَعِي مِنْ هَذَا الطَّيْرِ)
“Oh Allāh, bring me the most beloved of your creation to eat this bird with me”
The first aspect of the response is that the ħadīþ is in fact not mutawātir as they claimed it to be. As for its authenticity, Sunnī scholars have had disagreement, with some considering it reliable and others weakening it. A Šīʿī had attempted to compile chains for the ħadīþ, and we will use these chains to demonstrate why the ħadīþ cannot be mutawātir. The compilation of the chains is on this link:
We must first note that the total number of Ṣaħābah it is attributed to here are 7, which is a number for which tawātur would not even be conceivable in most cases. When we go through each of these attributions, we find that this claim already does not even hold up to criticism. Firstly, as for the narration of Jābir رضي الله عنه, its wording explicitly contradicts what the Šīʿah are using it as a proof for, since it mentions ʾAbū Bakr, ʿUmar, and ʿUþmān being brought before ʿAlī رضي الله عنهم. As for the narration of Saʿd رضي الله عنه, it is a lone obscure weak chain, which does not even mention the wording of the ħadīþ being narrated. The lone chain of ʾAbū Ðarr رضي الله عنه is also very weak, and is even more obscure than that of Saʿd رضي الله عنه, since it is taken from a relatively obscure Šīʿī book claiming to transmit from Sunnī scholars through unknown narrators. As for the chains of Ibn ʿAbbās رضي الله عنهما, then they are a handful of chains (from only Sunnī sources) that all go through a single weak path, and around half of these chains use a wording that does not provide any indication whatsoever for the Šīʿī claim. Finally, for the chain of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, it has only a handful of singularly narrated chains from Šīʿī books, and it is unclear whether any of these chains are even reliable by Šīʿī standards. Concluding from here, the aforementioned chains cannot be considered evidence in any significant way.
What we now have left are 2 Ṣaħābah, as ʾAnas رضي الله عنه has many weak chains narrating from him, with a few being possibly acceptable, and Safīnah رضي الله عنه also has a few weak chains with one being possibly acceptable. Many of the chains from ʾAnas رضي الله عنه also use wordings with no indication whatsoever for the Šīʿī claim. Having reached this conclusion, it must be known that tawātur cannot be reached through a narration of only 2 people, especially when the attribution to any of those 2 is debatable, and this ħadīþ can only be considered ʾāħādī. Appealing to the total number of chains being large is the appeal of one who is ignorant of what tawātur means, because to achieve tawātur there must be a sufficient number of narrators to achieve absolute certainty in every stage, which is not the case here. Even the amounts of narrators in the latest stages do not suffice to produce absolute certainty. Contrary to the misunderstandings of some, there is no particular number of narrators at which tawātur is automatically achieved, and the minority of scholars who gave minimum numbers for tawātur were saying that it is impossible for it to occur under that number, not that it occurs every time that number is present.1 According to the majority view, the judgement of tawātur is based on whether certainty occurs, and the number of narrators needed for this varies by situation. In this situation, as demonstrated, a claim to certainty is an unfounded assertion.
For the Šīʿah to claim this to be mutawātir, if they had any semblance of a consistent standard, it would force them to accept the ʾaħādīþ such as those of praise of ʾAbū Bakr, ʿUmar, and ʿUþmān رضي الله عنهم, and the ʾaħādīþ indicating the Xilāfah (caliphate) of ʾAbū Bakr رضي الله عنه, leading to their argument falling back on them. These ʾaħādīþ have much greater numbers of chains than this and paths that are more widespread, in addition to many external supporting factors. Indeed, the ʾaħādīþ of praise of ʾAbū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما exceed even the tawātur of Ħadīþ al-Ğadīr and Ħadīþ al-Manzilah. As for Ħadīþ aṭ-Ṭayr, it is much less widely transmitted among the ʾUmmah than any of these others, and the claim of its tawātur can only be seen as an absurd assertion. Even the ʾaħādīþ that can be used to prove the superiority of ʾAbū Bakr رضي الله عنه over the rest of the Ṣaħābah are comparable in terms of spread in transmission to the ʾaħādīþ used to claim superiority for ʿAlī رضي الله عنه; what primarily differentiates them is that their chains are stronger for ʾAbū Bakr رضي الله عنه. The unjustified Šīʿī claim of the tawātur of this ħadīþ can only be considered hypocritical, as it is based on a standard lacking any shred of consistency.
In fairness, many scholars have reasonably judged that due to the large number of chains, and the fact that the weakness in some of them is not severe and could even be considered acceptable, that the ħadīþ should be accepted and judged as ħasan (good).2 Even if this conclusion is not taken and the ħadīþ is considered weak, based on the majority of scholars weakening all of its chains,3 the ħadīþ ought to have some kind of basis and cannot realistically be considered fabricated, as pointed out by other scholars, and its weakness would be considered slight.4 Indeed, when considering the totality of the ʾaħādīþ that could be taken to apparently suggest that ʿAlī رضي الله عنه is the most virtuous, it is unrealistic to flatly reject all of them as fabricated, although most or potentially all of them may be dubious or weak in chain. Even then, the claim of tawātur is unfounded and based on self-defeating and hypocritical standards.
The meaning of the ħadīþ also does not contain sufficient proof for the Šīʿī claim. The most direct aspect is that Sunnīs accept the validity of the ʾImāmah of a less virtuous person over one who is more virtuous. Regardless, the ħadīþ does not even definitively prove the superiority of ʿAlī over ʾAbū Bakr رضي الله عنهما, and we know by certainty that the apparent wording of the ħadīþ must receive a taʾwīl (reinterpretation). First, we must ask the question of whether the generality of the statement “most beloved of your creation” by default would include the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. This is one of the questions of ʾUṣūl al-Fiqh, and the majority of scholars say that the speaker (in this case the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم) by default is included in his own general statements,5 and the Šīʿah agreed with the majority Sunnī view on this issue.6 If the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is by default included in his own general statements, then his exclusion would make it a ʿām maxṣūṣ, which as we have mentioned before would be a relatively weak proof for the rest of what it contains. According to the Sunnīs, Zaydīs, and some of the Twelvers, even other prophets are also excluded from this generality, and according to the Zaydīs the angels are too.
It cannot be said that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is automatically excluded from the generality of the statement due to the context of it being impossible for him to be brought to himself, since the wording of the statement “most beloved of creation” in itself is still applicable to him, indicating that the meaning the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم intended by it was still not absolute. Even if this objection were to be granted for the sake of argument, the ʿām prior to specification is still a ð̣annī proof for its individual components according to the majority of scholars,7 including the entirety of the Šīʿah.8 Even according to the minority view, what it means for it to be definitive is that the ʿām statements of the Qurʾān and mutawātir ʾaħādīþ cannot be specified by ð̣annī evidences before we know with certainty that they have exceptions, and since this narration is ʾāħādī, it would not be a sufficient evidence according to any view.
Definitive proof has established that the prophets are the best of mankind, and as for the proofs for the ranking of virtue between the Ṣaħābah, the majority of Sunnī scholars do not consider them to be definitive. Indeed, Sunnī scholars accept the fact that there are seemingly contradictory evidences on this matter, and that they are all ð̣annī. Ħadīþ aṭ-Ṭayr can be interpreted9 to mean someone who is from among those who are the most beloved of creation to Allāh, rather than the single most beloved, or to mean the most beloved among the extended family of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم who were present there with him, or to refer to the most beloved for a certain matter like eating that meal with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Such taʾwīl is completely valid in the usage of the Arabic language, and allows the ħadīþ to be reconciled with other proofs that must be taken into account. A comparable example is the authentic ħadīþ narrated by both Sunnīs10 and Šīʿah11 in which the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم says (مَا تُقِلُّ الْغَبْرَاءُ، وَلَا تُظِلُّ الْخَضْرَاءُ مِنْ ذِي لَهْجَةٍ أَصْدَقَ، وَلَا أَوْفَى مِنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ شَبِيهِ عِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ) “The sky has not shaded nor has the earth carried any possessor of a tongue more truthful or reliable than ʾAbū Ðarr.” We know by agreement of all Muslims that there have been more truthful people than ʾAbū Ðarr رضي الله عنه, including the prophets and even others among the Ṣaħābah.
Another ħadīþ the Šīʿah used is the one known as Ħadīþ al-ʾInðār or Ħadīþ ad-Dār. Some Twelver scholars put this in the category of naṣṣ jalī, but as will soon become clear, that is far from being the case. The ħadīþ relates to the revelation of the ʾāyah { وَأَنذِرْ عَشِيرَتَكَ اَ۬لَاقْرَبِينَ } “And warn the nearest people of your clan.” (26:214) Many ʾaħādīþ are narrated about the revelation of this ʾāyah, and the vast majority of them are not narrations of the story referred to by the Šīʿah.12 On top of this, all of the narrations of that story used by the Šīʿah contain weakness,13 not to mention that they do not come anywhere near tawātur, while the other narrations that do not contain that story, and narrate the situation of the revelation of that ʾāyah completely differently, are unanimously and unequivocally authentic and widely transmitted by many Ṣaħābah in many different sources.14
In any case, we will quote the versions of the story used by the Šīʿah that contain the least weakness, and at least have somewhat contestable chains. This story says that in the beginning of the prophethood, Allāh commanded the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to gather Banū Hāšim and inform them of his new message. In compliance with the command, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم told ʿAlī رضي الله عنه to prepare food and drink, and then gathered Banū Hāšim and held a feast. After everyone had eaten and drank their fill, with the food and drink having miraculously sufficed them all to their fill without depleting, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم put out a question towards them, and the only one to respond affirmatively towards it out of all of them was ʿAlī رضي الله عنه. Disregarding the many differences on the details of the aforementioned story, what is relevant here is the wordings narrated of the question. We will provide here the 3 versions containing the least weakness, with chains that have been accepted by some scholars, although these chains are still weak upon investigation.
(يَا ابْنَ عَبْدِ الْمُطَّلِبِ، إِنِّي بُعِثْتُ إِلَيْكُمْ خَاصَّةً وَإِلَى النَّاسِ بِعَامَّةٍ، وَقَدْ رَأَيْتُمْ مِنْ هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ مَا رَأَيْتُمْ، فَأَيُّكُمْ يُبَايِعُنِي عَلَى أَنْ يَكُونَ أَخِي وَصَاحِبِي)
“Oh children of ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, indeed I have been sent to you specifically and to mankind generally, and you have seen what you saw of this sign, so who among you will pledge allegiance to me so he can be my brother and companion?”15
(مَنْ يَضْمَنُ عَنِّي دَيْنِي وَمَوَاعِيدِي، وَيَكُونُ مَعِي فِي الْجَنَّةِ، وَيَكُونُ خَلِيفَتِي فِي أَهْلِي)
“Who will guarantee for me my debts and promises, and be alongside me in Heaven, and be my successor for my family?”16
(أَيُّكُمْ يَقْضِي عَنِّي دَيْنِي)
“Who among you will settle my debts for me?”17
As can be seen in these wordings, it is clear that these narrations do not contain appointment for Xilāfah or ʾImāmah, or even anything related to it at all, and are nowhere near being naṣṣ jalī. Brotherhood and companionship are indicative of the high status, virtue, and trustworthiness of ʿAlī رضي الله عنه. Succession for the family of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم occurred for ʿAlī رضي الله عنه without question, since he succeeded the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in taking care of Fāṭimah and her children رضي الله عنهم, and taking ʿAlī رضي الله عنه to be the settler of the debts of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم also has no relation to ʾImāmah. For this event, the Šīʿah clung to some fabricated wordings, which when taken in an isolated manner without context, appear to give an indication for Xilāfah. Despite this, when these weak versions are taken in context with the less weak versions, it becomes clear what the intended meaning was in the event, supposing it really occurred, making them inapplicable as evidence for the claim of the Šīʿah.
The Šīʿah also quoted another known authentic and mutawātir ħadīþ for their claim of the ʾImāmah of al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn after ʿAlī رضي الله عنهم. The ħadīþ is as follows:
قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: (الحسَنُ وَالحسينُ سَيِّدَا شَبابِ أهْلِ الجنَّةِ)
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn are the masters of the youths of the people of paradise.”
The Šīʿah argued that everyone in paradise is a youth, and that due to this, the ħadīþ must mean that al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn رضي الله عنهما are the best of those in paradise, except for the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, and that this necessitates them being the next rightful ʾimāms after ʿAlī رضي الله عنه.
The response to this is clear; for this to be a consistent argument, al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn رضي الله عنهما would have be better than the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the rest of the prophets, which we know by necessity to be false, and would have to be better than ʿAlī رضي الله عنه, which is also false by agreement. Just as the Šīʿah made these cases exceptions, there is no reason that other Ṣaħābah, namely ʾAbū Bakr, ʿUmar, and ʿUþmān رضي الله عنهم, cannot also be made exceptions. The wording is a ʿām maxṣūṣ, which is a relatively weak proof as has already been mentioned. Looking at the wording of the ħadīþ, we can easily judge that it is most likely not referring to the entirety of the people in heaven, because if it were, then the addition of the word “youths” would be entirely meaningless. This is because, as already noted, everyone in heaven is a youth when they are there. Furthermore, even if this were a proof for al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn رضي الله عنهما being superior to the Xulafāʾ, it would not establish their ʾImāmah. Not only do Sunnīs believe that a less virtuous person can be an ʾimām over a more virtuous person, but during the reign of ʾAbū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما, al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn رضي الله عنهما were children who had not even reached the age of moral responsibility, which means they lacked a necessary condition of ʾImāmah, irrespective of whether they would have a higher status in the afterlife.
Multiple interpretations of the ħadīþ have been given by the scholars of ʾAhl as-Sunnah:18
- The statement can be referring to the state of being youths at the time of death. Despite the fact that al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn رضي الله عنهما did not die as youths, those who gave this interpretation said that such a statement is reasonable with respect to their state at the time of the statement being made, or that it can refer to the fact that they conducted themselves like youths in terms of their chivalry.
- The statement can be referring to their status of being youths at the time of it being made, and it would mean that they are the best in paradise of those who are youths at that point in time of the statement.
- The statement can mean that they are the best of those in paradise except for the prophets and al-Xulafāʾ ar-Rāšidūn, as everyone in paradise is a youth, and the generality of the statement would be specified by the proofs for the superiority of the aforementioned people.
Regarding the ħadīþ: (الحسن والحسين إمامان قاما أو قعدا) “al-Ħasan and al-Ħusayn are ʾimāms whether they stand or sit,” then it is a fabrication which none of the scholars of ʾAhl as-Sunnah accepted as authentic, and there is no evidence of its tawātur, making it pointless to dispute its meaning.
- البحر المحيط للزركشي – التواتر , المستصفى للغزالي – الشرط الرابع : في العدد
↩︎ - النقد الصحيح للعلائي – ص51 , المنح الفكرية لابن حجر الهيتمي – ص588
↩︎ - الضعفاء الكبير للعقيلي – ج1 ص46 , سؤالات البرذعي لأبي زرعة الرازي – حديث#930 , مسند البزار – حديث#7547 , البداية والنهاية لابن كثير – ج7 ص352 , العلل المتناهية لابن الجوزي – ج1 ص233
↩︎ - تذكرة الحفاظ للذهبي – ج3 ص164 , سير أعلام النبلاء للذهبي – ج13 ص233 , طبقات الشافعية الكبرى للسبكي – ج4 ص169
↩︎ - البحر المحيط للزركشي – مسألة دخول المخاطب في عموم خطابه , شرح العضد على مختصر المنتهى مع حاشية السعد والجرجاني – ج2 ص688
↩︎ - مبادئ الأصول للعلامة الحلي – ص156
↩︎ - البحر المحيط للزركشي – مسألة دلالة العموم على الأفراد , البحر المحيط للزركشي – مسألة تخصيص المقطوع بالمطنون
↩︎ - محاضرات الخوئي في أصول الفقه – مسألة تخصيص الكتاب بخبر الواحد , أصول الفقه للمظفر – ج1 ص159
↩︎ - قوت المغتذي للسيوطي – حديث #1043 , سير أعلام النبلاء للذهبي – ج13 ص232
↩︎ - المستدرك للحاكم – حديث #5460
↩︎ - علل الشرائع للشيخ الصدوق – ج1 ص177
↩︎ - الدر المنثور للسيوطي
↩︎ - حديث أيكم يقضي ديني ويكون خليفتي ووصيي من بعدي – صلاح الدين الإدلبي
↩︎ - صحيح البخاري – حديث #4770 , صحيح مسلم – حديث #205 , صحيح البخاري – حديث #4771 , صحيح مسلم – حديث #204 , صحيح مسلم – حديث #207 , صحيح مسلم – حديث #208 , الدر المنثور للسيوطي
↩︎ - مجمع الزوائد لابن حجر الهيتمي – حديث #14109
↩︎ - مجمع الزوائد لابن حجر الهيتمي – حديث #14665
↩︎ - مجمع الزوائد لابن حجر الهيتمي – حديث #14110
↩︎ - قوت المغتذي للسيوطي – حديث #1058
↩︎
Transliteration Index
ء = ʾ
ا = Ā ā
ب = B b
ت = T t
ث = Þ þ
ج = J j
ح = Ħ ħ
خ = X x
د = D d
ذ = Ð ð
ر = R r
ز = Z z
س = S s
ش = Š š
ص = Ṣ ṣ
ض = Λ̣ λ̣
ط = Ṭ ṭ
ظ = Ð̣ ð̣
ع = ʿ
غ = Ğ ğ
ف = F f
ق = Q q
ك = K k
ل = L l
م = M m
ن = N n
ه = H h
و = W w, Ū ū
ي = Y y, Ī ī
Leave a Reply