29 — FIRST VOLUME, 80th LETTER

This letter, written to Mirzâ Fat-hullah Hakîm, informs that of the seventy-three groups stated in the hadîth, the one group that will be saved is the Ahl as-sunnat group:

May Allâhu ta’âlâ bless you with the fortune of walking along the lightsome avenue of Muhammad Mustafâ ‘alâ sâhibissalâtu wassalâm’! Persian line in English:

This matters, nothing else!

A hadîth-i-sherîf stated that Muslims will fragment into seventy-three groups. Each of these seventy-three groups claims to obey Islam. Each group says that they are the one group that will be saved from Hell. It is declared in the fifty-third âyat of Mu’minûn Sûra and in the thirty-second âyat of Rûm Sûra: “… Each party rejoices in that which is with itself.” However, among these various groups, the sign, the symptom of the one that will be saved is given by our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ as follows: “People who are in this group are those who follow the way which I and my Sahâba follow.” After mentioning himself, the owner of Islam did not need to mention the Sahâba ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în; yet his mentioning them may come to mean: “My way is the way which my Sahâba follow. The way to salvation is the only way which my Sahâba follow.” As a matter of fact, it is declared in the eightieth âyat of Nisâ Sûra: “He who obeys My Messenger has certainly obeyed Allâhu ta’âlâ.” Obeying the Messenger is obeying Allâhu ta’âlâ. Disobeying him is disobeying Allâhu ta’âlâ. Declaring: “They want to differentiate between the way of Allâhu ta’âlâ and the way of His Messenger. They say, ‘We believe some of what you say but we do not believe other aspects.’ They want to open a different way between the two. Certainly they are disbelievers,” about those who presume that obeying Allâhu ta’âlâ is different from obeying His Messenger, in the hundred and fiftieth âyat of Nisâ Sûra, He informs us that they are disbelievers. He who says that he follows the Prophet ‘’alaihissalâtu wassalâm’ although he does not follow the way of the Sahâba ‘ridwânullahi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ is wrong. He has not followed him ‘sall- Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, but he has disobeyed him. He who has taken such a way will not attain salvation in the Hereafter. In the eighteenth âyat of Mujâdala Sûra, “They think they are doing something right. It should be known that they are liars, disbelievers,” He shows how such people are.

People who follow the way of the Sahâba ‘alaihimurridwân’ are no doubt the group of the Ahl as-sunnat wa-l-jamâ’at. May Allâhu ta’âlâ give plenty of rewards to the superiors of this group, who worked undauntedly without falling tired! The group that will be saved from Hell is only this one. For, he who speaks ill of our Prophet’s ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ Sahâba ‘’alaihimurridwân’ has thereby certainly deprived themselves from following them. Examples of such unfortunate people are the Shiite sect and the group called Khârijî.

[There are twelve groups of Râfidîs. Each group has parted into sub-groups. Some of them lead a life without an ablution, without a ghusl. Few of them perform namâz. They all hold heretical beliefs. They hold the Râfidî belief. They call themselves ’Alawî. But ’Alawî means a person who loves and follows the Ahl-i bayt. Imâm-i Alî and his children from Hadrat Fâtima are called the Ahl-i bayt. The honour of loving the Ahl-i bayt has fallen to the lot of the Ahl as-sunnat, who have said that loving and following them will cause one to die with îmân. Then, the ’Alawîs are the Ahl as-sunnat, not the Shi’îs. Therefore, a person who wants to be an ’Alawî has to be Sunnî. Today, Râfidîs, zindîqs, and people who have no relationship with Islam rejoice in the name ’Alawî, stealing it from the Ahl as-sunnat. Under the shade of this beautiful name, they try to mislead the youth from Rasûlullah’s way.]

The Mu’tazila group appeared later. Wâsil bin Atâ, its founder, used to be a disciple of Hadrat Hasan-i Basrî ‘rahmatullâhi ’alaih’; because he dissented from Hasan-i Basrî’s way by saying that there was a third aspect between îmân and kufr, Hasan-i Basrî said, “I’tazala annâ,” about him, which means, “He has dissented from us.” All the other groups, appeared later.

To slander the Sahâba means to slander Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. As is declared: “He who disrespects the Sahâba does not have îmân in Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Messenger.” For, to slander them means to slander their owner, their master ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us against falling into such a dirty creed. It is the Sahâba who conveyed to us the religious rules which originated from the Qur’ân al-kerîm and from hadîths. When they are slandered, what they conveyed loses its value. Islam was not conveyed to us by a few certain people among the Sahâba. Each of them has a service, a share in this. They are all equal in trueness, in justice and in (the authenticity of) their teaching. When any one of the Sahâba ‘’alaihimurridwân’ is slandered, the Islamic religion will have been slandered and cursed. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect us all from falling into such a loathsome situation!

If those who swear at the Sahâba say, “We still follow the Sahâba. It is not necessary to follow them all. In fact, it is not possible, for their words do not agree with each other. Their ways are different,” We will answer them as follows:

To have followed some of the Sahâba, it is necessary not to deny any of them. When some of them are hated, the others have not been followed. Amîr [’Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’], for instance, respected the other three Khalîfas, deemed them great and knew that they were worth obeying. He obeyed them willingly and accepted them as Khalîfas. Unless the other three Khalîfas are loved, it will be a lie, a slander to say that one follows Hadrat ’Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum’. In fact, it will mean to dislike Hadrat ’Alî and to refute his words. It would be idiocy and ignorance to say that Hadrat ’Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’, who is Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Lion, was disdainful of them, that he only smiled at them. How could a wise person ever say that Allah’s Lion, despite his great knowledge and bravery, concealed his enmity against the three Khalîfas, pretended to be friends with them and established a superficial friendship with them for a full period of thirty years. Even the lowest Muslim could not stomach such hypocrisy. We should be aware of the ugliness of such words which belittle Hadrat Amîr to such an extent and which represent him as an impotent and deceitful munâfiq. Even if we could admit for a moment that Hadrat Amîr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ was so —may Allah protect us from such a supposition— what would they say about the fact that our Master the Prophet ‘sall- Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ praised these three Khalîfas, lauded them and esteemed them throughout his life? Would they say that our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was hypocritical, too? Never! It is impossible. It is wâjib for the Prophet ‘sall- Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ to tell the truth. He who says that he was deceiving them becomes a zindiq, becomes irreligious. Allâhu ta’âlâ declares in the sixty-seventh âyat of Mâida Sûra: “O My dear Messenger! Proclaim what was sent down to you from your Allah! If you do not communicate this message correctly, you will not have done your duty as a Prophet! Allâhu ta’âlâ will protect you against those who want to bear enmity towards you.” The disbelievers had been saying that Hadrat Muhammad ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had been communicating whatever suited his purpose and not communicating whatever did not suit his purpose of the Qur’ân that had been revealed to him. Upon this, this âyat descended to declare that he had been telling the truth. Our Prophet ‘sall- Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ praised the three Khalîfas and held them above all others until he honoured the Hereafter with his presence. This means to say that it cannot be an error or wrong to praise them and to hold them superior.

It is necessary to follow all the Sahâba in the tenets to be believed, for there is no difference among them in the facts to be believed. There may be a difference in the furû’, that is, in acts to be performed.

A person who speaks ill of one of the Sahâba ‘ridwânullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ has blemished all of them. For, the îmân, the belief of all of them is the same. He who slanders one of them has followed none of them. He has said that they disagreed with one another and that there was no unity among them. To slander one of them means to deny what he said. Let us say once more that all the Sahâba communicated Islam. Each of them is just and right. There is something in Islam communicated by each and every one of them. By each one communicating âyats, the Qur’ân was collected. He who dislikes some of them will have disliked someone who communicated Islam. As is seen, this person will have failed to act in accordance with Islam in its entirety. Can such a person be saved from Hell? Allâhu ta’âlâ declares in the eighty-fifth âyat of Baqara Sûra: “Do you believe some of the Qur’ân and deny the rest? The punishment of those who do so is to be disgraced and to be a subject of scorn in the world. And in the Hereafter they will be hurled down into the most vehement torment.”

The Qur’ân al-kerîm was collected by Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy- Allâhu ’anh’. In fact, it was collected by Abû Bakr-i Siddîq and ’Umar Fârûq ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhumâ’. The Qur’ân that was collected by Hadrat Amîr was other than this one. As it can be understood, slandering these great people is tantamount to slandering the Qur’ân al-kerîm. May Allâhu ta’âlâ protect all Muslims from falling into such a tragic situation! One of the mujtahids of the Shiite sect was asked, “The Qur’ân was collected by Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’. What would you say about the Qur’ân collected by him?” He answered, “I do not see any use in finding fault with the Qur’ân, for slandering the Qur’ân causes the religion to be demolished.”

Certainly, a wise person cannot say that all the Sahâba ‘radiy- Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ agreed about a wrong decision on the day when our Master the Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ passed. In fact, on that day thirty-three thousand of the Sahâba unanimously made Hadrat Abû Bakr-i Siddîq ‘radiy- Allâhu ’anhum’ Khalifa willingly. It is impossible for thirty-three thousand Sahâbîs to agree on a mistake. As a matter of fact, our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had declared: “My Ummat never agree concerning a wrong decision.” The reason why Hadrat Amîr was first sorry was because he was not called to those talks. He himself conveyed that this was so and said, “I was sorry because I was called to the talks late. But I know well that Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ is superior to us all.” There was a reason why he was called late. That is, he was then among the Ahl-i bayt; he was consoling them.

The disagreements among the Sahâbîs ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihim ajma’în’ of our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ were not because of the desires of the nafs or for evil thoughts, for their blessed nafses had been purged and become quite pure. They had gotten rid of being ammâra and attained itmi’nân (to believe and understand the truth). Their only desire was to obey Islam. Their disagreements were on account of a difference of ijtihâd. Their intention was to find out what was right. Allâhu ta’âlâ will give one grade of thawâb to those who erred, too. There are at least two grades of thawâb for those who were right. We should not hurt any of those great people with our tongues! We should mention each of them with good terms. Hadrat Imâmi Shâfi’î ‘rahmatullâhi ’alaih’, who was one of the greatest savants of the Ahl as-sunnat, said: “Allâhu ta’âlâ did not smear our hands with their blood. So let us not smear our tongues!” Again, he said: “After Rasûlullah, the Sahâba pondered very much. Finding no one on earth superior to Abû Bakr-i Siddîq, they made him Khalîfa. They accepted to be serving under him.” This statement of Imâm-i Shâfi’î also shows that Hadrat ’Alî was never hypocritical and that he willingly accepted Abû Bakr-i Siddîq as the Khalîfa.

Mayân Shaikh Abulkhayr’s son, Mayân Sayyid, is a descendant of great and noble people. Also, he was in your service in the Dakkan campaign. It is hoped that he will be blessed with your help and kind treatment. Mawlânâ Muhammad ’Ârif is also a student of knowledge and a descendant of the great. His father is dead. He was a khodja. He came to you in order to receive his stipend. It is hoped that Your Highness will help him. Wassalâm wa-l-ikrâm!

[Islamic savants wrote myriads of books in order to prove that the Shiites have deviated from the right path and that especially the Râfidîs, the most unbridled and the most excessive of their twenty groups, have altogether dissented from Islam; they have even been striving to demolish Islam. The names of some of them together with their authors have been given below. On behalf of religious brotherhood and humanity, I invoke Allâhu ta’âlâ that our brothers in Islam who say that they are ’Alawîs should read these books carefully, so that they will observe the difference between the Ahl as-sunnat and Râfidîs and choose the right way through wisdom, conscience and reason and not believe the lies and slanders of the ignorant separatists. Thereby they will attain happiness in this world and in the Hereafter by holding fast to the way of safety and salvation.

Of the books written by Islamic savants in order to advise the Shiites, here are a few:

1— The book Ibtâl-ul-Manhaj-il bâtil was written by Fadl bin Ruzbahân. It refutes the book Minhâj-ul-karâma by Ibn-ul- Mutahhir, one of the Shiite savants, and rebuts its errors through documents. He wrote the book in Isfahan in 852 A.H. [1448 A.D.].

2— The book Nuzhat-ul-ithnâ ’ashariyya, written by Mirzâ ’Ahmad bin ’Abdurrahîm-i Hindî. It gives information about Shiites. He passed away in 1255 [A.D. 1839].

3— The book Nawâqid was written by Mirzâ Mahdûm. The book An-nawâqid lil-Rawâfid was written by Sayyid Muhammad bin ’Abdurrasûl Barzanjî, who was drowned in the sea in 1103 [1711 A.D.].

4— The book Mukhtasar-i Nawâqid is an abridged version of the book Nawâqid. It was summarized by Muhammad bin  ’Abdurrasûl-i Barzanjî.

5— The book Seyf-ul-bâtir li-riqab-ish-shâ-t-i warrâfida-tilkawâfir was written by Shaikh ’Alî bin Ahmad Hîtî in Istanbul in 1025 A.H.

6— The book Ajwiba-tul Irâqiyya ’alal-as’ilatil-Irâniyya was written by Shihâbuddîn Sayyid Mahmûd bin ’Abdullah ’Âlûsî of Baghdâd, a Shâfi’î scholar, d. 1270 [1854].

7— The book Ajwiba-tul Irâqiyya ’alal-as’ilatil-Lâhûriyya was written by ’Âlûsî. Also, Haydarî wrote a similar book.

8— The book Nafahât-ul-qudsiyya fî mabâhis-il-imâmiyya fîradd- ish-shî’a, written by ’Âlûsî, refutes the Shiites.

9— The book Nahj-us-salâma also was written by Shihâbuddîn ’Âlûsî.

10— The book Sârim-ul-hadîd was written by Muhammad Amîn bin ’Alî Baghdâdî. It refutes the slanders of Ibni Abil- Hadîd.

11— The book Radd-u-alal-imâmiyya was written by ’Alî bin Muhammad Suwaydî Baghdâdî. He was in the Shâfi’î Madhhab. He passed away in Damascus in 1237 [1822 A.D.].

12— The book Hâdîqa-t-us-sarâir was written by ’Abdullah bin Muhammad Bitûshî. He was a Shâfi’î and Baghdâdî, and passed away in Basra in 1211 [1797 A.D.].

13— The book Tuhfa-i ithnâ ’ashariyya fî radd-ir-rawâfid was written in Persian by Shâh ’Abdul’âzîz-i-Dahlawî. He passed away in 1239 [1824 A.D.]. Its Arabic translation was abridged by Shukrî ’Âlûsî and printed with the title Mukhtasar-i Tuhfa in Baghdad, and it was reproduced in Istanbul in 1976.

14— The book Minha-t-ul-ilâhiyya mukhtasar-i Tuhfa-i ithnâ ’ashariyya was written by Mahmûd Shukrî ’Âlûsî. It was printed in Cairo in 1373 A.H.

15— Imâm-i Rabbânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ explains the superiorities of the Sahâba very well with documentary proofs in his book entitled Maktûbât.

16— The book Hujaj-i qat’iyya was written in Arabic by ’Abdullah-i-Suwaydî. It was printed together with the Arabic book an-Nâhiya an-ta’n-i-Amîr-ul-mu’minîn Mu’âwiya in Istanbul in 1981.

17— In the books Milal-Nihal by Shihristânî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ and in its Turkish, English, French and Latin versions, Shiism is explained in detail and answers are given.

18— The Turkish book Tezkiya-i Ahl-i bayt gives beautiful answers to the Shiites. It was written by ’Uthmân Bey, who was the Shaikh of Topkap› Mevlevîhânesi, and it was printed in Istanbul in 1295 A.H. Along with Hujaj-i Qat’iyya, it was printed in Latin alphabet in the Turkish book Hak Sözün Vesîkalar› in Istanbul.[1]

19— Hadrat Imâm-i Rabbânî’s ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ book Radd-i-Rawâfid is in Persian and its Turkish version has been printed in Latin alphabet in the book Hak Sözün Vesîkalar›[1] in Istanbul.

20— The great savant Ibni Hajar-i Haytamî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ proves that Shiites are wrong through âyats and hadîths in his book Savâ’iq-ul-muhriqa.

21— Ibni Hajar, again, proves very well that Hadrat Mu’âviyya ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ cannot be spoken ill of, in his book Tathîr-ul-janân wallisân an Mu’âwiyya-tabni-Abî Sufyân.

22— Ibni Taymiyya, in his book Minhâjus-sunna-tinnabawiyya fî naqdi kalâm-ish-shî’as wa-l-qadariyya, refutes the book Minhâj-ul-karâma by Ibnil-Mutahhir, one of the Shiite savants, through strong documents.

23— Ibni Taymiyya, again, explains the superiorities of the Sahâba, through strong documents in his book Fadâil-i Abû Bakr wa ’Umar.

24— In the translation of Mavâhib-i ladunniyya and in Mir’âti kâinât the glory of the Sahâba is explained.

25— The Turkish pamphlet entitled Sahâba-t-al kirâm by Sayyid Abdulhakîm-i Arwâsî ‘rahmatullâhi ta’âlâ ’alaih’ was printed in Istanbul. It is a very useful book.[2]

26— The book Nûr-ul-Hudâ, written by Karakashzâda ’Umar bin Muhammad Bursawî Halwatî in 1005 A.H. [1597 A.D.], answers the Shiites and Hurûfîs. It was printed in Istanbul in 1286 A.H. He passed away in Edirne in 1047 [1638 A.D.].

27— Manâqib-i Chihâr yâr-i ghuzîn, which is in Turkish, explains the superiorities of the Sahâba ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anhum ajma’în’ very well. It was written by Sayyid Ayyûb bin Siddîq Urmawî. It was reprinted various times. The editions of 1264 A.H. and 1998 A.D., Istanbul, are only beautiful.

28— Shiism is told about and the advice which Islamic savants gave to them are explained in full length in the books Sahâba ‘The Blessed’ and Documents of the Right Word.

29— It is written in the books Berîqa and Hadîqa that people who believe in transmigration and those who hold the belief that Allah entered a certain person’s body are disbelievers.

30— Yûsuf Nabhânî, in the final part of his book Shawâhidul- haqq, gives very beautiful responses through documents to the Shiites.

31— Sayyid Ahmad Dahlân ‘rahmatullâhi ’alaih’ vehemently refutes the Shiites in his book Al-fat-hul-mubîn. This book of his was printed as an addition at the end of Hujaj-i qat’iyya by Suwaydî. (Please see item 18.)

32— Shah Waliyullah-i-Dahlawî ‘rahmatullâhi ’alaih’ refutes the Shiites through strong documents and praises Hadrat Mu’âwiyya very much in his book Izâlat-ul-hafâ an khilâfat-ilkhulafâ. The book, in Persian, was printed in Pakistan in 1392 [1972 A.D.] together with its Urdu translation. It comes in two volumes.]

[1] This book was translated into English in 1992. The English version, entitled Documents of the Right Word, is available from Hakîkat Kitâbevi, Darüşşefeka Cad. 53/A P.K. 35 34083 Fâtih-‹stanbul- Turkey. [2] Its English version, SAHÂBA ‘The Blessed’, is available from Hakîkat Kitâbevi, in Istanbul.

LEAVE A REPLY