Answering-Ansar trapped in its own logic [Saqifa Incident]

Answering-Ansar says

there are two crucial hadith attributed to the Holy Prophet (saaws) that would have been invaluable had they been advanced during the debate at Saqifa:

  1. If the Iman of the Ummah were on one side and Abu Bakr’s on the other side, Abu Bakr would have weighed heavier. What greater claim to superiority can there be than that Muslim with the greatest Iman greater than the Ummah put together.
  2. If there had to be a Prophet after me it would have been Umar – Again Hadhrath Umar is given the rank of a Prophet (saaws) could anyone in the Ummah had been superior to a ‘would be Prophet’.

What better opportunity could there have been than this one, by advancing these two hadith, would the matter not have been resolved forthwith? Who could supersede men who have such hadith in their favor? Unfortunately no such hadith were advanced at the Saqifa, if these hadith are indeed true do you not think that they would have been placed before the Ansar, rather than spurious claims of superiority based along tribal loyalties?

I agree with Answering-Ansar, if these two ahadith were explicit proofs that Abu Bakr was the first caliph or Umar was the second caliph, they would have been put forth at the incident of saqifa.

But the question is, what does Answering-Ansar says about the hadith

“Of whomsoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla (master).”

Was it put forth at saqifa by anyone? While Answering-Ansar itself says that the Prophet said this just before his departure from the world.

It was on the day of Ghadhir, shortly before his own departure from this world, that the Holy Prophet drew on the words denoting his own authority as the Khalifa of Allah mentioned above in Sura Al Ahzab, verse 6, in the form of asking the believers “Do I have more right over the believers than they have over themselves?, and when the people cried “Yes O Messenger of Allah” he transferred that authority to Ali (as), with the words

“Of whomsoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla (master).”

So the whole people, from Muhajireen as well as Ansar, forgot this explicit proof of imamate in such a short period? Of course that is not possible, although what is obvious and according to the logic of Answering-Ansar is that it is NOT the proof of Imamate of Ali as the Shiites would like it to be. Neither was it considered to be such an explicit proof, or else someone would have reminded the people of this hadith at saqifa.

The biggest reference to Ali  (of which Answering-Ansar didn’t give any reference) according to AA itself is

At two points the name Ali was mentioned by the Ansar. At one point as mentioned one Ansar admitted that none could debate about authority if Ali asked for it. We would ask the readers to carefully ponder over the words here. A man from the Ansar amidst the debate acknowledges that if Ali (as) was to enter the debate all pledge their allegiance to him. Why would he say such a thing, unless the khilafat was Ali (as)’s exclusive right? Later when the oaths were being rendered in the building some Ansar said they would only give it to Hadhrath Ali, clearly in their view he had a right in the matter.

But absolutely no mentioning of the hadith

“Of whomsoever I am his Mawla, Ali is his Mawla (master).”

So we understand from this that the people at that time didn’t consider this hadith to be the proof of Imamate of Ali, a simple and logical thing that Shias don’t realize not because this is something illogical, but because it is easier for them to put a barrier between their thinking and logic instead of accepting the simple truth.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: