Mahmood Abu Maryam

Trying to make sense of it all...

56526

The event of Mubahala took place on 24th Dhu'l hijja 9 AH and the event of Ghadir Khumm took place almost a year later on 18th Dhu'l hijja 10 AH.

The Prophet (s) passed away within a few months of Ghadir Khumm. At the first anniversary of that event Abu Bakr was in power and unlikely to celebrate an event that would undermine his own rule.

53982

These four quotations from historical sources should help answer this question.

Al-Hakim, in his al-Mustadrak, states that the Prophet kept confiding in 'Ali till the time of his death. Then he breathed his last.

When the body of the Prophet (s) was being given ghusl, according to Tarikh al-Khamis, al-’Abbas, Fadhl and Qutham turned the body of the Prophet (s) from one side to the other as Usamah and Shaqran poured water over it. All of them were blind-folded.

Ibn Sa'd narrates in his al-Tabaqat from Imam 'Ali that the Prophet had so enjoined that if anyone except himself ('Ali) had given him the funeral bath, he would have gone blind.

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, in his al-Isti'ab, quotes 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas as saying that 'Ali had four such exceptional honours to his credit as none of us had, and he listed them all, the fourth being that he was the only person who gave the Prophet his funeral bath and lowered him in his grave.

53381

A practical way to get such counts is to use specialist hadith software or websites. It will need a good command over Arabic as such advanced and comprehensive search tools are not available in English.

52138

With such questions, it sometimes helps to think about our own selves and how we behave in this world. That can give useful insights on the Divine. There is a narration along the same lines that states that "Whoever knows himself knows his Lord".

So in that vein, let's think about a few realities of this world. We are on a rock that is spinning at a certain speed and revolving around the sun at a certain pace, while keeping a certain distance from it. We are alive, as biological creatures, because of these facts. Everything we do, even the atmosphere we breathe, exists because of such uncontrollable facts.

The fact that we can even drive a car on a motorway is a function of these and other uncontrollable facts, such as the various laws of physics and chemistry. Think speed, inertia, the combustion of fuel.

We didn't get asked about these laws and rules, and we don't seem to complain about them. We just accept them as, quite simply, laws of nature.

However, in such a world, we find we do have some choices. 

So now let's go for a drive on this motorway. Imagine you pick up pace in your car and get to a nice comfortable speed suitable for a motorway. You are probably cruising along, chatting to others in your car, listening to a nasheed. Happy and content.

Now imagine what would happen if you suddenly, for no reason whatsoever, decided from your own free will to twist that steering wheel around!

Death, destruction, both of your own vehicle and several others who are unable to avoid collision with the maniac who did that.

The impact of that crash is a result of the laws of physics, obviously. And chemistry - the fuel tank blows up. And biology - the fragile human bodies cannot survive the impact.

At this point, do you feel the laws of physics, chemistry and biology that govern your lives are unfair and should have been different?

Isn't it true that we take those uncontrollable facts as a given, unchallenged, and would place total blame on the terrible exercise of free will of the driver?

Why don't we feel the same way when we think of Divine laws? The horrific punishments are simply laws having their consequences when the driver on the motorway of life decides to do crazy things despite being warned not to do so by the Creator who set the rules.

Remember that there was no fear when you were on that motorway. Just a clear and constant awareness of the rules and the boundaries.

And just as the laws of nature in this world are there to nurture life here, the Divine laws of religion are there to keep us in the correct lane so we reach the right destination in the afterlife.

There is no need to be fearful of God in the meaning of being terrified and scared. But rather being in a state of awareness of the Divine rules and boundaries. And that is called Taqwa.

And there is no contradiction with God's Love or Mercy. The fact that He created us with free will so we can navigate His path, and then sent Books and Messengers, is a sign that He loves us and wants us to succeed.

I wish you a safe and pleasant journey, but do drive carefully :)

51965

I wish to add some more names and details to complement the respected Sayyid al-Musawi's clear response to this question.

Overall, a good book one can refer to for names of the nawasib - enemies of the Ahl al-bayt (a) - who appear in Sunni hadith is Hashim Ma`ruf al-Hasani's Dirasat fi’l hadith wa’l muhaddithin published in Beirut.

Here are some more examples of such ignoble people appearing in Sunni hadith sources.

1. `Umar b. Sa`d

`Umar b. Sa`d needs no introduction for those aware of the details of the tragedy of Karbala. This son of Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas, the companion of the Prophet (s), led the troops on the ground against Imam al-Husayn (a).

Al-Tabari quotes Ibn Sa`d, after the Imam (a) had been mercilessly killed: 

Then `Umar b. Sa’d called out among his followers, "Who will volunteer [to go] to al-Husayn and make his horse trample on al-Husayn’s body?" Ten volunteered. Among them was Ishaq b. Haywah al-Hadrami, who was the one who stole al-Husayn’s shirt and later got leprosy, and Ahbash b. Marthad b. ‘Alqamah b. Salamah al-Hadrami. They trampled on the body of al-Husayn with their horses until they had crushed his back and his chest. I learned that some time later an arrow from an unknown direction hit Ahbash b. Marthad as he was standing in a battle. It split his heart, and he died. (Al-Tabari, al-Ta’rikh, translated into English as ‘History of al-Tabari – The Caliphate of Yazid b. Mu’awiyah’, Howard, pp. 163) 

Some example of the Prophet’s (s) hadith quoted by Sunni scholars on the authority of `Umar b. Sa`d! 

  • Al-Tirmidhi, Sunan, kitab sifat al-janna `an rasulillah, volume 4, page 678 
  • Al-Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-mujtaba, kitab tahrim al-dam, volume 7, page 121 
  • Al-Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-kubra’, volume 6, page 263 
  • Al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-kubra, volume 3, page 375 
  • Ahmad b. Hanbal, al-Tabarani, and others. 

2. `Abd al-Rahman b. `Abza

`Abd al-Rahman b. `Abza (or `Abzi) al-Khuza`i was a companion of the Prophet (s). He was present with the troops of Ibn Ziyad who fought and killed Imam al-Husayn (a). (See al-Dinawari, al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, page 298).

See some of the narrations by him in: 

  • Al-Bukhari, Sahih, kitab al-tayammum, volume 1, page 129 
  • Muslim, Sahih, kitab al-hayd, volume 1, page 280 
  • Al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Maja, and many others 

3. al-Harith b. Yazid al-Kufi

Al-Harith b. Yazid al-`Akali al-Taymi al-Kufi seems to the al-Harith b. Yazid b. Ruwaym on whose services Ibn Ziyad called upon by sending him from his own base in Kufa to join `Umar b. Sa`d’s army (See al-Dinawari, al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, page 254). No other ‘al-Harith b. Yazid’s in rijal lexicons seem to hail from Kufa.

See his narrations in: 

  • Al-Bukhari, Sahih, kitab al-`itq, volume 2, page 898 
  • Muslim, Sahih, kitab fada’il al-sahaba, volume 4, page 1957 
  • Al-Nasa’i, Ibn Maja, and others. 

4. Shabath b. Rib`i

Abu `Abd al-Quddus Shabath b. Rib`i al-Tamimi al-Yarbu`i was a man with a checkered background. A companion of the Prophet (s), he used to be once on the side of Imam ‘Ali (a), then joined the Khawarij and later was part of Ibn Ziyad’s troops in Karbala fighting Imam al-Husayn (a)!

See: 

  • al-Dinawari, al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, page 254; 
  • al-`Asqalani, al-‘Isaba, volume 3, page 376 
  • al-`Asqalani, Tahdhib al-tahdhib, volume 4, page 266. 

From al-Tabari, from the scene of the battle of Karbala: 

He (i.e.`Umar b. Sa`d) put `Azrah b. Qays al-Ahmasi in command of the cavalry and Shabath b. Rib`i al-Yarbu`i in command of the footsoldiers. (Al-Tabari, al-Ta’rikh, translated into English as ‘History of al-Tabari – The Caliphate of Yazid b. Mu’awiyah’, Howard, pp. 121) 

Some narrations from Shabath in: 

  • Abu Dawud, Sunan, kitab al-‘adab, volume 4, page 315. 
  • Al-Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-kubra’, volume 6, page 204. 

5. Qadi Shurayh

Abu Umayyah Shurayh b. al-Harith b. Qays al-Kindi was a judge in Kufa. He connived with the Umayyad authorities in Kufa in suppressing the Shi’a and supporters of Imam al-Husayn (a) from rallying to the call of Muslim b. `Aqil and Hani’ b. `Urwa shortly before the onset of the battle of Karbala. He had a share in the responsibility for the murder of Hani’ by Ibn Ziyad (See al-Dinawari, al-Akhbar al-Tiwal, page 238).

Shurayh narrates traditions in: 

  • Al-Nasa’i, Sunan, kitab al-`umra, volume 6, page 277 
  • Ahmad b. Hanbal’s al-Musnad, and other books. 

There are many other narrators who cursed and hated Imam ‘Ali (a), as confirmed by Sunni books of rijal, and are yet present in major Sunni books narrating Prophetic hadith.

Here is a list that has been gathered from several sources, particularly al-Hasani’s work mentioned above. The list is in no particular order and there are quite likely to be more such narrators that could not be identified and included.

  1. Hurayz (or Hariz) b. ‘Uthman
  2. Busr b. Artat 
  3. `Urwah b. al-Zubayr
  4. Abu Bardah b. Abu Musa al-Ash`ari
  5. Ishaq b. Suwayd b. Hubayrah
  6. Husayn b. Numayr al-Wasiti
  7. Dawud b. al-Husayn al-Madani
  8. Muhammad b. Ziyad al-Alhani, Abu Sufyan al-Himsi
  9. al-Mughirah b. Muqsim, Abu Hisham
  10. `Abdullah b. Salim al-Ash`ari al-Himsi
  11. Qays b. Abi Hazim al-Bajali
  12. Thawr b. Zayd al-Daylami
  13. al-Walid b. Kathir bar Yahya al-Madani
  14. Walid b. `Uqba
  15. `Abdullah b. Abi Sarh
  16. Ash’ath b. Qays
  17. Marwan b. al-Hakam
  18. Abu Bakra Nafee` al-Thaqafi
  19. Ahmad b. Abdah Musa Janabi
  20. Ishaq b. Suwayd b. Hubayrah al-`Adwi al-Taymi
  21. Isma`il b. Samee` al-Hanafi
  22. Thawr b. Yazid Kala’i al-Himsi, Abu Khalid
  23. Jarir b. `Abdullah al-Bajali
  24. Habib b. Maslama
  25. Khalid b. Salamah al-Kufi
  26. Khalid b. Abdullah al-Qasri
  27. Rashid b. Sa`d Maqrahi
  28. Rafi` b. Khadeej
  29. Ziyad b. `Alaqah
  30. Sa`id b. al-`As al-Umawi
  31. Sa`id b. al-Musayyab
  32. Samurah b. Jundab
  33. Shaqeeq b. Salamah al-Asadi
  34. `Abd al-Rahman b. Habib (Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Aslami)
  35. `Abdullah b. al-Zubayr
  36. `Abdullah b. Zayd Abu Qalaba
  37. `Abdullah b. Salim
  38. `Abd al-`Aziz b. Marwan
  39. `Abd al-Malik b. Marwan al-‘Umawi
  40. `Uthman b. `Asim
  41. `Umar b. Thabit al-Ansari al-Khazraji
  42. `Imran b. Husayn
  43. `Amr b. `Abdullah, Abu Ishaq al-Sabi’I
  44. Masruq b. Ajdah
  45. Nafi` b. ‘Amr, Abu Sa`ud al-Ansari
  46. Hisham b. Isma`il

49092

I understand where you are coming from with this question. Investigating and researching the topics around the Shi'a Sunni division can be mind boggling when there are claims and counter claims from both sides and the quality of evidence put forward by each side also gets challenged by the other.

Here is a suggestion to help you get started that is designed with your preference in mind of avoiding sectarian bias in your research.

Step 1

Start with the Nahj al-Balagha which is a collection of sermons and sayings by Imam 'Ali b. Abi Talib.  Although it was compiled by a Shi'a scholar named Sharif al-Radi but it attracted attention from many Sunni scholars who wrote commentaries on it. 

For instance see the list of commentators on this page, many of them are Sunni names - https://www.al-islam.org/articles/commentaries-nahjul-balaghah-syed-waheed-akhtar

The reason for the wider Sunni interest was that the sermons included by Sharif al-Radi could be traced to other sources acceptable to both the Shi'a and Sunni communities.  And, perhaps more importantly, a large part of the value of the book was in the eloquence of words and thoughts expressed by 'Ali who was a master at it, being the close disciple and confidante of the Prophet Muhammad (s). In fact, for many, the eloquence of the words also testifies to its authentic origins.

You can find the Nahj al-Balagha here - https://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha-part-1-sermons

When you go through this book, and I do suggest you go cover to cover, you will gain an insight into what 'Ali was saying to the people of Kufa during his time as the fourth caliph. You will get a sense of his views on the disputes, the civil wars, the various famous Companions and mothers of the believers who often get mentioned in Shi'a Sunni debates.

Step 2

Once you are through that, it is time to understand the entire history of the debate on the succession to the Prophet Muhammad (s). Contrary to what many people realise, a good understanding of the period of the civil wars during Imam 'Ali's rule is essential to understanding and evaluating the reports on the earlier period of Islamic history.

In order to avoid any intentional or unintentional sectarian bias by a Shi'a or Sunni author, I suggest you instead go through a book called Succession to Muhammad - A Study of the early Caliphate by a famous non-Muslim academic called Wilferd Madelung.

This book does a good job of looking at the often contradicting reports on early Islamic history and analyses the likelihood of bias of individual narrators and, therefore, reports. Although somewhat heavy reading, it will help you get a pretty good idea of what really happened back then in early Islam.

Good luck with your research.

49856

Shaykh Mansour Leghaei has responded to a similar question as follows:

"The time of the caliphate of Imam Ali (as) was one of the hardest periods in the history of early Islam. For the first time in history, three civil wars were imposed on Imam Ali (as).  During the periods of the previous Caliphs several innovations had occurred and were practiced for over two decades, among which was ‘Taraweeh’.  Imam Ali (as) had to stabilise the country from all the rebels on the one hand, and correct all the innovations occurring on the other. Undoubtedly, fighting the rebels was a paramount priority.

Shaykh al-Kulayni in an authentic narration quoted a long narration in which Imam Ali (as) listed numbers of innovations and how much he tried to stop Muslims from practicing them. As for ‘Taraweeh’ the holy Imam says:

“By Allah! I ruled that people should not offer any prayers in congregation other than obligatory ones. I informed them that offering the recommended prayers in congregation is an innovation. Then some of my soldiers who were fighting for me cried: ‘O Muslims! The tradition of Umar is getting changed as he (i.e. Ali) forbids us to offer the recommended prayers in groups.’ I was therefore concerned that part of my army revolt against me.” (al-Kaafi, vol. 8 p.63)

There is no authentic narration that Imam Ali (as) ever appointed anyone to lead their Taraweeh, nor that he ever endorsed it. He just gave up on them temporarily for a more important matter (i.e. fighting the rebels). Nowhere in the narrations was there a sentiment of the Taraweeh ‘being more or less spiritual’. It was all about ‘following a tradition set by Umar versus the Prophetic tradition’. Similarly, there is no authentic narration that Imam Ali (as) ever asked them to choose a leader to offer Taraweeh congregationally."

See full article here - http://www.askthesheikh.com/did-imam-ali-allow-taraweeh-prayers/

48843

There are some differences and many similarities in how the Jumu'a or Friday congregational prayers are conducted by the 4 Sunni schools of fiqh and the Shi'a Imamiyya.

The accurate version, of course, is with the Shi'a who held on to the teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt, the family of the Prophet (s), as commanded by the Prophet (s) himself, and gave their teachings on every issue precedence over other sources of information.

The salient differences in how the Friday prayers are conducted by the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Ja'fari (Imami) schools of law are laid out by Shaykh Muhammad Jawad Maghniyya in his Five Schools of Islamic Law.

See - https://www.al-islam.org/prayer-salat-according-five-islamic-schools-law-allamah-muhammad-jawad-maghniyyah/friday-prayer

49005

There is no difference in the belief among Muslims that the Mahdi will be a descendant of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and Fatima al-Zahra. Even the most bitter Shi’a-hating and Yazid-loving tiny segment of extremist Muslims have this belief.

That, right there, is an important point to ponder upon.

But the majority and brotherly Sunni’s have narrations suggesting that the Mahdi will be a descendant of Imam al-Hasan, rather than Imam al-Husayn, and that his father’s name will be ‘Abdullah.

For the Shi’a al-Mahdi is indeed the descendant of Imam al-Hasan, except that it is his father’s name, al-Hasan al-’Askari, himself a descendant of Imam al-Husayn.

The real difference, as mentioned in the question, is the narration that suggests the name of ‘Abdullah as the father. The Shi’a do not accept that, and neither do many Sunni’s.

In fact, there are a number of Sunni scholars who have acknowledged the birth of the Mahdi as the son of Imam al-Hasan al-’Askari.

For instance, see https://www.al-islam.org/al-imam-al-mahdi-just-leader-humanity-ayatullah-ibrahim-amini/chapter-5-who-was-imam-after-hasan-al#sunni-ulama-and-birth-mahdi

49017

Temporary marriage, or mut'at al-nisa, was sanctioned in Islamic law via the revelation of Qur'an 4:24. There is no debate between the various schools of Islam, as far as I know, about this verse being revealed to confirm the validity of this kind of marriage.

The debate is about its scope and whether it stays applicable to this day or was rendered void in the early years of Islam.

Ibn Taymiyya, well-known for his lack of love for the Shi'a, writes:

  • According to Ibn Hazm: Ibn Mas'ud, Mu'awiya, Abu Sa'id (al-Khudri), Ibn 'Abbas, Salama and Ma'bad, the sons of Umayya bin Khalaf, Jabir (bin 'Abdullah al-'Ansari), and 'Amr bin Hurayth continued, after the death of the Prophet, to consider it (i.e. mut'a) lawful. Moreover, Jabir reported, regarding all the Companions, that they continued to uphold its lawfulness during the time of the Prophet and of Abu Bakr and almost till the end of 'Umar's caliphate.
  • Then he (i.e. Ibn Hazm) adds, "Among the Successors of the Companions, Tawus, Sa'id b. Jubayr, 'Ata', and the rest of the Makkan jurists believed in its permissibility."

    Source: Ibn Taymiyya al-Harrani, al-Muntaqa min Akhbar al-Mustafa, edited by Muhammad Hamid al-Faqqi, 2 volumes, Cairo: al-Maktabat al-Tijariyya, 1931 edition, volume 2, page 520.

This is confirmed from multiple earlier sources but this seemed like a nice summary to share.

The two key messages, then, are as follows:

1. Something happened towards the end of Umar b. al-Khattab's rule as caliph that made most, but not all, people stop practicing mut'a.

The event that led to many people abandoning mut'a was a declaration by 'Umar as follows:

  • Jabir b. 'Abdullah reported: We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of dates or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and during the time of Abu Bakr until 'Umar forbade it in the case of 'Amr b. Huraith.

    Source: Saheeh Muslim: Book 008, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 3249

In his famous Tafsir, Ibn Jarir al-Tabari under verse 4:24 that, as mentioned earlier, is the Qur’anic basis of mut’a, reports a narration from al-Hakam bin 'Uyayna who was asked whether this verse on mut'a was abrogated.

He said, "No." He then said, "'Ali said that had it not been for 'Umar's prohibition of the mut'a, no one would have committed zina except a scoundrel.'"

An easily accessible source in its English translation is Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti's Ta'rikh al-khulafa where al-Suyuti has a section for the 'Firsts' of 'Umar. He says quite clearly that 'Umar was the first to prohibit mut’a. See page 136 of the book The History of the Khalifas who took the Right Way, by Ta-Ha publishers, 1995 edition.

2. Those who continued to consider it permissible included much later scholars.

These included, as mentioned by Ibn Taymiyya, Tawus b. Kaysan, Sa'id b. Jubayr, 'Ata b. Abi Rabah who were all considered authorities of hadith transmission and are relied upon by the Bukhari, Muslim and so on.

Therefore, the validity of mut’a was a bona fide valid legal position in Islamic circles even a century after the Prophet’s demise.

But by that time the waters had been muddied by the hadith fabricators.

Knowing that ‘Ali and those who were inclined towards him held it valid, and knowing that ‘Umar’s prohibition in itself was not convincing enough for all legal scholars, words were put in the mouth of ‘Ali to say mut’a had been banned by the Prophet (s) on the day of Khaybar.

There are several reasons why this does not add up, and why the narration must be discarded as false.

  • Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani quotes saying that ".... in it (narration) is the banning of the nikah of mut'a on the day of Khaybar, and this thing is not known by any of the scholars of the sirah or the narrators of reports".
    Source: al-'Asqalani, Fath al-Bari, Cairo edition, volume 9, page 138
  • al-'Ayni, another major commentator on Bukhari's Sahih, says: "Ibn 'Abd al-Barr said that the mention of the banning of mut'a on day of Khaybar is incorrect"
    Source: al-'Ayni, 'Umdat al-Qari, Cairo edition, volume 17, page 246
  • al-Qastallani, another major commentator on Bukhari's Sahih, says: "al-Bayhaqi said that it (i.e. banning of mut'a at Khaybar) is not known by any of the scholars of the sirah"
    Source: al-Qastallani, 'Irshad al-Sari, Cairo edition, volume 6, page 536

Conclusion

So there are two important matters here that touch on the essence of what happened after the Prophet (s) and why the Muslim community is divided even today.

First, it is about what happens when you follow the wrong role model after the Prophet (s) who, consistent with his temperament, decided one day to ban mut’a following his own personal judgement and also promised punishment to those who opposed that ruling.

Second, this is about how fake narrations were created to support ‘Umar’s unilateral banning of mut’a as a tool of propaganda against ‘Ali’s position. These were created long after ‘Umar had passed away, during and soon after the time of the Fitna when the community lay divided between ‘Ali’s supporters and his enemies.

A banning by ‘Umar could never stand against the position of ‘Ali and the Ahl al-Bayt who maintained that mut’a was allowed. And so the fabricators went to work to create fake hadith so they could attribute that decision of ‘Umar back to the Prophet (s) and, cheekily, do it through ‘Ali himself.

But liars always leave traces. You just have to know where to look.

48691

These ten Companions of the Prophet (s) are called the ‘ashra mubashshara'. Although there are some minor variations in the Islamic sources, here is one narration that identifies those 10 individuals.

The Messenger of Allah said: "Abu Bakr is in Paradise, ‘Umar is in Paradise, ‘Uthman is in Paradise, ‘Ali is in Paradise, Talhah is in Paradise, al-Zubayr is in Paradise, ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Awf is in Paradise, Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas is in Paradise, Sa’id b. Zayd is in Paradise, and Abu ‘Ubaydah b. al-Jarrah is in Paradise."

So here are some interesting facts about this narration:

  1. The first four people in the list became caliphs in exactly that order. Each of them became caliph in a different way. Abu Bakr in a heated exchange in the hall of Saqifa, ‘Umar as appointed by Abu Bakr on his deathbed, ‘Uthman as a result of the odd committee handpicked by ‘Umar with the express purpose of preventing ‘Ali from becoming the next caliph. And ‘Ali in a popular election after the violent riots against ‘Uthman caused his murder.
     
  2. None of the caliphs, or any of their supporters, ever quoted this narration to justify their eligibility for the caliphate.
     
  3. All of the people listed are Muhajir, none of them Ansar.
     
  4. According to a well-known hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad (s), was angry with Abu Bakr and stopped speaking to him, and continued assuming that attitude till she died. She is considered by consensus of all Muslims to be the leader of all Muslim women in paradise.
     
  5. ‘Umar got informed once that people were planning on giving the oath of allegiance to ‘Ali after his death. He addressed the people and said:

    (O people!) I have been informed that a speaker amongst you says, 'By Allah, if `Umar should die, I will give the pledge of allegiance to such-and-such person.' 

    One should not deceive oneself by saying that the pledge of allegiance given to Abu Bakr was given suddenly and it was successful. No doubt, it was like that, but Allah saved (the people) from its evil, and there is none among you who has the qualities of Abu Bakr. 

    Remember that whoever gives the pledge of allegiance to anybody among you without consulting the other Muslims, neither that person, nor the person to whom the pledge of allegiance was given, are to be supported, lest they both should be killed

    And no doubt after the death of the Prophet (s) we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa’ida. ‘Ali and Zubayr and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. 

    I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' 

    We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa’ida… Full narration from Sahih al-Bukhari linked here
     

  6. ‘Uthman was not open to good advice from ‘Ali suggesting he fix financial malpractices in his government filled with his Umayyad relatives.

    Narrated by Ibn Al-Hanafiya: If Ali had spoken anything bad about 'Uthman then he would have mentioned the day when some persons came to him and complained about the Zakat officials of 'Uthman. 

    'Ali then said to me, "Go to 'Uthman and say to him, 'This document contains the regulations of spending the Sadaqa of Allah's Apostle so order your Zakat officials to act accordingly." 

    I took the document to 'Uthman. 'Uthman said, "Take it away, for we are not in need of it."

    Source: Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Number 343
     

  7. Abu ‘Ubaydah b. al-Jarrah was the one who went with Abu Bakr and ‘Umar to Saqifa, hours after the Prophet (s) died, to ensure the Ansar did not take over the caliphate. He was presented as a candidate for caliphate in that meeting by Abu Bakr.
     
  8. Talha came out in open warfare against ‘Ali in the Battle of Jamal. In that conflict he sent word to Talha b. ‘Ubaydullah to come and meet him. Talha came to him and ‘Ali said:

    “I adjure you by Allah, did you hear the Messenger of Allah say: "Of whomsoever I am master, `Ali is his master. O Allah, befriend the one who befriends him and be at enmity with one who is at enmity with him?"

    He said: "Yes." ‘Ali said: "Then why do you fight against me?"

    He said: "I do not remember." He (the narrator) said: Then Talha departed.

    Source: al-Hakim al-Naysaburi, al-Mustadrak `ala al-Sahihayn, Haydarabad: Da'irat al-ma`arif al-nizamiyyah (4 vols), 1334-42 AH vol. 3, p. 371
     

  9. Sa’d b. Abi Waqqas did not participate in any battles alongside ‘Ali during his rule. He preferred to stay neutral.
     
  10. That leaves Sa'id b. Zayd. Other than the fact that he also did not participate in Jamal or Siffin alongside 'Ali, this brother-in-law of 'Umar b. al-Khattab also has one more remarkable attribute.

    He is the only one to narrate this hadith that includes himself in the list!

CONCLUSION

The narration of the 10 who were promised paradise is simply fake news! It is yet another example of fabricated narrations created during and after the civil wars to bolster a Sunni narrative that aimed to cover over the cracks left from that period of great fitna and division in the Muslim community.

48581

The Sunni tradition fully confirms the event of Ghadir Khumm and no Sunni scholar to my knowledge has ever entirely denied it. 

The Sunni masses, on the other hand, are largely unaware of this hugely important event. When known, it is considered one of many Prophetic merit narrations in favour of 'Ali and the other Companions and not anything specific to succession of 'Ali after the Prophet (a).

The differences come down to the details of what happened in that event and its context and, therefore, implication for the succession to the Prophet Muhammad (s).

SHI'A UNDERSTANDING

You should first read the entire event here - https://www.al-islam.org/ghadir/incident.htm

The Shi'a believe that on the day of Ghadir Khumm, the Prophet Muhammad (s) was commanded to announce the system of his succession and introduce to his followers the first person who will immediately succeed him in that system.

So the system was declared through a segment of his speech that is famously referred to as the Hadith al-Thaqalayn. In that narration he stated that he was leaving behind the Qur'an and his Ahl al-Bayt, and if the people were to adhere to them both they would never go astray after him.

The person as well as the true nature of succession was introduced through the words man kuntu mawlahu fa 'Aliyyun mawlahu. It translates to:

  • For whomsover I am master, 'Ali is his master.

UNAMBIGUOUS DESIGNATION

The word used mawla was the perfect term to use for the comprehensive authority, walaya, that was possessed by the Prophet (s) and that was being vested in 'Ali as the first member of the chosen Ahl al-Bayt.

'Ali was not simply being made a Caliph nor just an Imam. Each of these labels are open to many interpretations of scope, geography, and timeframe. If designated a khalifa at Ghadir Khumm instead of mawla people could have accepted him as the first one but only for the years he ruled, and only for the area he ruled. If just called an imam, he could have been considered simply a prayer leader in a mosque!

People can get very creative when they want to derail a system, or if they have to explain away a derailed system from history.

So with Divine inspiration the Prophet (s) made clear the scope of the authority that was being vested in 'Ali in multiple ways. He repeated the portion of Qur'anic verse 33:6 as a question and got the public to acknowledge that he was closer to them and had more authority over them than their own souls. The man kuntu mawlahu designation itself tightly coupled his own walaya to that of 'Ali. And the Qur'anic verse 5:3 of ikmal that was revealed immediately thereafter announced the completion and perfection of religion as a result of that declaration.

SOURCES

Every single fact mentioned above is attested by Sunni sources of tafsirhadith, and history. In all, 110 Companions of the Prophet (s) are documented to have narrated this event in varying levels of detail. And that makes Ghadir Khumm the most widely narrated hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (s) on any topic whatsoever in Sunni sources!

This is quite remarkable given that it was about an issue that divided the Muslim community. Its level of attestation despite that fact is certainly something to think about.

SUNNI MISUNDERSTANDING

This raises the question of how the Sunni scholars understand the Ghadir Khumm event.  Clearly, and by the very definition of being Sunni, they acknowledge the legitimacy of the caliphate of Abu Bakr. And so, for them, Ghadir Khumm was not about authority but about love and friendship towards 'Ali. This was based on taking an alternative meaning for mawla in the context of the event.

And for that context, it was considered to be unhappy soldiers from Yemen who had complained about 'Ali to the Prophet (s). But this theory is full of holes and cannot be reconciled with the full details of the event as documented on the link given earlier in this response.

As just one example, consider the fact that out of 110 Companions who narrated Ghadir Khumm, only 1 Companion - Burayda b. al-Husayb - mentions Yemen as the context. None of the other Companions mention Yemen or the unhappy soldiers as the context for the event.

And he was a Companion who was himself upset at 'Ali and was complaining to the Prophet (s) about him and thereby angered him (s) - all according to his own report!

There are many other holes in this Yemeni red herring narrative, feel free to ask another question about them and I can elaborate further, God-willing.