MobileVersion
www.valiasr-aj .com
Why did commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] oppose Abu Sufyan’s rising against “Abu-Bakr”?
ID: 599 Publish Date: 18 July 2017 - 14:02 Count Views: 165
Question & Answer » public
Why did commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] oppose Abu Sufyan’s rising against “Abu-Bakr”?

Doubt  Description:

Written by: Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami”

Martyrdom of hadrat “Fatimah”: The biggest lie of the history

“We believe that this matter is the biggest lie and libel of the history and such things has never happened. To prove this issue, we can discuss comprehensively but small page of our website can’t stand it, so, we mention to several issues in this regard.

“Quraysh” would be considered as the biggest and the strongest tribe in Saudi Arabia peninsula and inside “Quraysh”, “Bani Hashim” was the best and the most powerful race and all had accepted its superiority. It was cousins of “Banu Umayya” race who would sometimes compete but when came to another person, these two races would unite with each other at once. For instance when It was said that “Abu-Bakr” {from “Bani Tim, very weak race of “Quraysh” tribe} was selected as prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] successor, it was intolerable for “Abu Sufyan” who had just converted to Islam and shouted:

اين الاذلان؟

Where are those two humble guys?

He was asked: whom do you mean? He said: “Ali” and “Abbas”. After facing “Ali” and “Abbas”, “abu Sufyan” told them: why are you sitting idly by? Who is “Bani Tim” race to take the leadership? The he said:

والله لاملان المدينة خيلا و رجالا

Swear to god! I’ll fill “Medina” with infantry and cavalry and take reign from them by force.

“Ali ibn abi Talib” who was listening to sayings of “Abu Aufyan” warned him and said: if you take any action against “Abu-Bakr”, I’ll be the first person who will stand against you. We believe that “Abu-Bakr” deserves it. “Abu Sufyan” got upset, said some bad words and left.

“Tabari” – Tarikh Tabari – vol. 2 chapter: The beginning of “Abu-Bakr” caliphate

“Quraysh” tribe that was the enemy of messenger of Allah [PBUH] wasn’t able to do anything against him because they were afraid of “Bani Hashim” revenge. Their last and the most important act against Prophet Muhammad [PBUH] was selecting one young man from each race to hit messenger of Allah [PBUH] by sword so that assassin remains unknown until prophet’s [PBUH] race “Bani Hashim” doesn’t know which clan to fight, so, they’ll have to take blood money and compromise. {if one or two races would do so, they were sure that “Bani Hashim” will show them their end} and this matter caused messenger of Allah [PBUH] to immigrate”.

Reviewing:

Notable point:

At first, we should mention to an important point and it’s complete attention to the phrase of this text written by: Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami” who has said: Martyrdom of Hadrat “Fatimah”: The biggest lie of the History.

We believe that this matter is the biggest lie and libel in the history and such thing is quite wrong and to prove this matter, we can discuss comprehensively but unfortunately, small page of our weblog can’t fit it, so we mention to several points.”

In your opinion if Ayatollah “Bastami” runs this weblog by himself or writes for this weblog?

If you Google his name, you just face one text that is written on tens of different Sunni websites without extra and less word and on all of them, they know it his writing.

Regardless who Ayatollah “Bastami” is, the one who’s just appeared without one year or one month record in Shia seminary schools and has writings like Sunni newfangled; since he’s written the first phrase of this text this way: written by Ayatollah “Bastami” and … without saying “In the name of god” at the beginning, we can realize that entire text is his; but we see words about weblog and … which isn’t match with speaking manner of an Ayatollah.

And also many other issues in his article are definite defense of things that Shias don’t accept them at all. We doubt if his really Shia. Maybe they say that he used to be Shia and then became Sunni that in this case, his words aren’t match with the sayings of a clairvoyant; because he doesn’t rely on even one Shia book and in some cases he quotes narratives as his evidence that Shias have quoted a narrative opposite of it that we’ll deal with it in our text.

So, we ask Sunni Mulavies that if they want to write an article, they’d better write it in their own name or don’t make such terrible mistake or at least they’d better write: one of that guy’s sayings; not written by him…!!!

Did “Abu Sufyan” want caliphate for himself or “Ali” and “Abbas”?

As for “Quraysh” and “Abu Sufyan”, Mulavi Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami” has confessed that in “Quraysh” tribe, “Banu Umayya” was the enemy of messenger of Allah [PBUH] and their chief was “Abu Sufyan”. And all know that the hit that “Banu Umaya” and “Quraysh” received from “Ali ibn abi Talib” [a.s], no other person received such hit from him. But we see in his writing that “Abu Sufyan” says to “Ali” [a.s]: if you want, I’ll fill “Medina” with cavalry and infantry!!! Is that mean that “Abu Sufyan”, enemy of hadrat “Ali” [a.s] wanted to take troops to “Medina” for hadrat “Ali” [a.s]? No naïve accepts it; that’s why commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] opposed him.

But why did “Abu Sufyan” go to hadrat “Ali” [a.s]? Why didn’t he say it to “Talhah” and “Zubayr”? Weren’t they amongst elders of “Quraysh”? And why didn’t he go to other people of “Quraysh” in “Medina”? Don’t Sunni say that hadrat “Ali” [a.s] agreed with caliphate of “Abu-Bakr”? this narrative shows very well that “Abu Sufyan” knew that commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] is right and wanted to use this weapon against Islam.

But as for the original narrative, we should say that Mulavi Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami” has deleted first and end of the narrative trying to say that “Abu Sufyan” wanted caliphate for “Ali” or “Abbas” and hadrat “Ali” [a.s[ didn’t accept it and said: “Abu-Bakr” is qualified to be caliph.

حدثني محمد بن عثمان بن صفوان الثقفي قال حدثنا أبو قتيبة قال حدثنا مالك يعني ابن مغول عن ابن الحر قال قال أبو سفيان لعلي ما بال هذا الأمر في أقل حي من قريش والله لئن شئت لأملأنها عليه خيلا ورجالا قال فقال علي يا أبا سفيان طالما عاديت الإسلام وأهله فلم تضره بذاك شيئا إنا وجدنا أبا بكر لها أهلا

حدثني محمد بن عثمان الثقفي قال حدثنا أمية بن خالد قال حدثنا حماد بن سلمة عن ثابت قال لما استخلف أبو بكر قال أبو سفيان مالنا ولأبي فصيل إنما هي بنو عبد مناف قال فقيل له إنه قد ولي ابنك قال وصلته رحم.

حدثت عن هشام قال حدثني عوانة قال لما اجتمع الناس علي بيعة أبي بكر أقبل أبو سفيان وهو يقول والله إني لأري عجاجة لا يطفئها إلا دم يا آل عبد مناف فيم أبو بكر من أموركم أين المستضعفان أين الأذلان علي والعباس وقال أبا حسن ابسط يدك حتي أبايعك فأبي علي عليه فجعل يتمثل بشعر المتلمس

ولن يقيم علي خسف يراد به إلا الأذلان عير الحي والوتد

هذا علي الخسف معكوس برمته وذا يشج فلا يبكي له أحد

قال فزجره علي وقال إنك والله ما أردت بهذا إلا الفتنة وإنك والله طالما بغيت الإسلام شرا لا حاجة لنا في نصيحتك.

“Abu Sufyan” said to “Ali” [a.s]: what’s happened that caliphate is in hand of the smallest race of “Quraysh”? If you want, I fill “Medina” with cavalry and infantry. “Ali bn abi Talib” said: O’ “Abu Sufyan”! It’s been long time that you have enmity with Islam and Muslims; but you couldn’t have hurt it, “Abu Sufyan”; “Abu-Bakr” is qualified to be caliph.

…. When “Abu-Bakr” became caliph, ”Abu Sufyan” said: what’s our relationship with “Abu Fusayl” {to accept his caliphate?} children of “Abd Manaf” are right; he was said: “Abu-Bakr” has appointed your son as governor. He said: he did the justice!

People gathered up to swear allegiance with “Abu-Bakr”, “Abu Sufyan” said: I see a riot that just blood quenches it. O’ children of “Abd Manaf”! What has been the position of “Abu-Bakr” in your works? O’ two humble men! O’ “Ali” and “Abbas”! Then he said to “Ali” [a.s]: O “Ali” give your hand swearing allegiance with you; “Ali ibn abi Talib” didn’t accept.

“Ali ibn abi Talib” [a.s] told him: with doing such works, you want nothing other than sedition. It’s been long time that you have enmity with Islam! We don’t need your benevolence.

“Al-Tabari” – Tarikh al-Tabari – vol. 2, p 237

To respect “Abu Sufyan” and because he realized that “Abu Sufyan” wanted to betray, Mulavi Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami” hasn’t quoted the original narrative written in Sunni books and has distorted its translation as well:

when It was said that “Abu-Bakr” {from “Bani Tim, very weak race of “Quraysh” tribe} was selected as prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] successor, it was intolerable for “Abu Sufyan” who had just converted to Islam and shouted:

اين الاذلان؟

Where are those two humble guys?

He was asked: whom do you mean? He said: “Ali” and “Abbas”. After facing “Ali” and “Abbas”, “Abu Sufyan” told them: why are you sitting idly by? Who is “Bani Tim” race to take the leadership? The he said:

والله لاملان المدينة خيلا و رجالا

Swear to god! I’ll fill “Medina” with infantry and cavalry and take reign from them by force.

“Ali ibn abi Talib” who was listening to sayings of “Abu Aufyan” warned him and said: if you take any action against “Abu-Bakr”, I’ll be the first person who will stand against you, we believe that “Abu-Bakr” deserves it. “Abu Sufyan” got upset, said some bad words and left.

As you see, Mulavi Ayatollah “Muhseni Bastami” has distorted that part of commander of the faithful’s [a.s] words that reveal intention of “Abu Sufyan”

Original narrative in Shia books:

Last part of this narrative with such content isn’t written in Shia books; but this content is in Sunni books; and it shows that author isn’t familiar with Shia narratives. So, in their discussions with Sunni, Shias only rely on the first part of this narrative; because its last part has been distorted and if last part in part in Shia books was as Mulavi Ayatollah “Bastami” had said, we wouldn’t have any discussion with Sunni in this regard and they could have relied on it; but original narrative in Shia books is as follow:

أما والله لئن شئتم لأملأنها خيلا ورجلا. فناداه أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام: ( ارجع يا أبا سفيان، فوالله ما تريد الله بما قول، وما زلت تكيد الإسلام وأهله، ونحن مشاغيل برسول الله صلي الله عليه وآله، وعلي كل امرئ ما اكتسب وهو ولي ما احتقب ).

Swear to god if you want, I’ll fill “Medina” with infantry and cavalry. Commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] told him: O’ “Abu Sufyan”! Come back; swear to god! You don’t consider god in what you’re sayig! You’ve always planned against Islam and Muslims. We’re busy with performing Prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] “Ghusl” and burying him. There is burden on everyone’s shoulder that himself has earned and he’s the supervisor of what he’s collected. {it means “Abu-Bakr” will carry the burden of his sins and rather than performing Prophet Muhammad’s [PBUH] “Ghusl” and burying him, he’s planning for his own caliphate!}

“Al-Sheikh Mufid” – Al-Irshad fi Ma’rifah Hujaj Allah alaa al-Ibad – vol. 1, p 190

But why did commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] not use “Quraysh” aid?

Answer is clear. If “Abu Sufyan” took troops to “Medina”, rather than “Abu-Bakr” and “Umar”, he’d first kill hadrat “Ali” [a.s] to root out Islam. This is the same point Hadrat “Ali” [a.s] mentioned.

Of course, as it’s written in “Al-Irshad” book and this narrative shows, this event occurred on the day of “Saqifah”, which means that commander of the faithful Ali [a.s] hadn’t sworn allegiance with “Abu-Bakr” yet; it’s gotten from some of Sunni texts as well; because they’ve said in the beginning of this narrative:

«لما اجتمع المهاجرون لبيعة ابي بكر»؛ «علي بيعة ابي بكر»؛ «لما بويع لابي بكر»؛ «لما اجتمع الناس علي بيعة أبي بكر».

When “Muhajirin” gathered up swearing allegiance with “Abu-Bakr”; or when the swore allegiance with “Abu-Bakr” or when people gathered up swearing allegiance with people.

But it’s written in “Sihah Sittah” {Sunni books} that “Ali ibn abi Talib” swore allegiance with him after six months. This context indicates that last part of this narrative in Sunni books is lie.

Conclusion:

His saying about “Abu-Sufyan” that he wanted take caliphate is true; but what matter is that for whom? Because when he saw caliphate has been taken from “Ali ibn abi Talib” and is in hands of “Abu-Bakr” and “Umar”, he decided to use this matter for himself; but because “Abu-Bakr” knew him, he appointed children of “Abu-Sufyan” as his special governors. So, it’s clarified that manner of “Abu-Sufyan” and his family and “Banu Umayya” was the same as the manner of “Umar” and all of them wanted to take Ali ibn abi Talib’s due at all cost.

Now question is that if it was logical that “Ali ibn abi Talib” uses Abu Sufyan’s aid and guys like him to take his due?

Good luck.



Share
* Name:
* Email:
* Comment :
* Security code: