Home » Islam » Islamic History » The Cognition of Companionship and Companions
   About Us
   Islamic Sites
   Special Occasions
   Audio Channel
   Weather (Mashhad)
   Islamic World News Sites
   Yellow Pages (Mashhad)
   Souvenir Album

The Cognition of Companionship and Companions

Ahmad Husain Yaqub


(As'hab, Sahaba, Sahibe, Yas'habu, Suhbeh, Sahabe.) According to the Arabic-Arabic dictionaries, these idioms mean to associate, to accompany, to sit with, to submit to, to accede to. (Sahib) means the associate, the submissive, the sitter with, the companion, the custodian or the keeper of a matter. This word (Sahib) is called on those who refer to a definite sect. It is said: the As'hab -followers- of Imam Ja'far, the As'hab of Abu Haneefeh,.. etc.

Allah, the Elevated, revealed the Quran in Arabic. One of the characteristics of Quran is being the only convictional reference of Arabic. It is the words of Allah, the knowing, dogmatically, of the most accurate hiddens and the deepest secrets of this language. By reading the Holy Quran, we discover that the words derived from the idiom involved are included in the following forms: (Tussahibeni, Sahibhuma, Sahibuhu, Sahibetihi, As'hab and As'habehum.) These forms were repeated ninety seven times in the Holy Quran.
The raised point is that there in no existence for the forms (Sahaba and Suhbe) in the Holy Quran.

By conjuring these words up, we find out that they are forming a perfect coverage of the entire lexical meaning previously referred to. This idiom may take a single face or aspect, or various faces and aspects. It may bear an ideal face representing the total rims of good and, in the same time, it may bear a face so ugly that it represents the gross rims of evil.

Suhbe may hint at relationship between two believers. It may hint at relationship between a man and his parents who are opposing his belief. It may hint at relationship between two companions in a journey. It may hint at relationship between a master and his slave. It may hint at relationship between a believer and a disbeliever. It may hint at comprehensive relationship between an individual disbeliever and a group of disbelievers. It may hint at relationship between a prophet and his disbelieving people who are aiming for pulling their prophet to the shed of evil. It may be compulsory. It may be a pursuing companionship that leads to an ill deed on which a general conduct is based. It may be a matter of submitting to a divine doctrine and an absolute loyalty to the political leadership of that doctrine. An example on this sort of companionship is the Prophet's family's submission and loyalty to the divine doctrine and the Prophet's political leadership, along with their notable sacrifices. Another example is the Prophet's virtuous choicest companions' submission and loyalty to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).
Pivot of companionship is comprehensive, based upon a doctrine, a leadership, goals and supreme idealities to the achievement of which the leader and his companions are working for submitting the whole society to the domination of that doctrine.

The following are the words of Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, the Shafi'ite:
“A Sahabi includes all those who met the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and believed in him till death.

The following categories are registered under the title of Sahaba:
1. Those who met the Prophet for a considerable or a brief period.
2. Those who reported the Prophet's traditions and those who did not.
3. Those who participated in battles led by the Prophet and those who did not.
4. Those who saw the Prophet, even without a meeting.
5. Those who could not see the Prophet for an accidental obstacle; such as blindness.
The following are excluded from the list of Sahaba, for the bound of believing:
Those who met the Prophet while they were believing in other prophets; such as the faithful Scriptuaries before Mohammed's divine envoy.
Scriptuaries who met the Prophet and believed that that would be the anticipated prophet are probably included with the Sahaba. An example is Bahira, the priest and his likes.
Every mandate human being and jinn are included in bound of believing in the Prophet.
Ibnul-Atheer's objection on Abu Musa's excluding some of the jinn mentioned in the list of the Sahaba is not unacceptable.
Ibn Hazm says: “They lied to the Islamic nations those who claim of unanimity. God, the Elevated, informed us that a group of jinn had believed and listened to the Quran recited by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Hence, they are Sahaba.”
Reckoning the angels with the Prophet's companions is a subject of discrepancy. As Fakhruddin Ar-Razi, in his Asrarur-Tenzil, reported the unanimous claim that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had not been sent to the angels, a many scholars disagreed to him. Providing a number of arguments, Sheik Teqiyyuddin As-Sebki alleged that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had been sent to the angels, too.
By bound of (believing till death), the apostates who denounced their disbelieving in the Prophet's divine message after they had met him, are excluded from the list of Sahaba. An example is Ubeidullah Bin Jahsh. With his wife, Ummu Habiba, he declared his being Muslim and immigrated to Abyssinia. Unfortunately, he embraced Christianity there till his death. Abdullah Bin Khatl who was killed while he was hanging to curtains of Ka'ba is another example.
Muslims who defected their apostasy are reckoned with the Sahaba according to bound of (believing till death), even if they had never seen or met the Prophet. Regarding the earlier part of this category, there is unanimity on the ruling that apostates who return to Islam before their death are Sahaba, while some scholars had preservations against this class. Relying upon the hadithists' agreement on reckoning Ibn Qeis, who returned to Islam in Abu Bakr's reign after he had apostatized, with the Sahaba and recording his reports in the most remarkable books of hadith, the earlier preservations are not satisfactory.

Ibn Hajar's definition is extracted from the most authentic opinions adopted by supreme scholars, such as Al-Bukhari and his tutor, Ahmed Bin Hanbal and their followers. There are, however, many disorderly opinions appertained to identifying the Prophet's companions. Among these is the opinion that institutes four conditional qualifications of Sahaba. A Sahabi is only that who enjoyed a considerable period of companionship with the Prophet, and his reports, regarding the Prophet's traditions, were taken into account, and participated in the Prophet's battles or was martyred with him (peace be upon him and his family.) Others instituted maturity and sitting with the Prophet as provisories of regarding companionship. A group named every single individual who had seen the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) as a Sahabi. Pursuant to the rule that capability of seeing cannot be imputed to the undiscerning, the previous opinion includes discerning individuals only. At any rate, those undiscerning individuals are Sahaba since they were seen by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family.) Regarding those whose dead bodies had been seen by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), like Abu Thuweib Al-Hutheli, the poet, there is a discrepancy about reckoning them with the Sahaba. It is more acceptable to exclude them.

Means of proving a Sahabi is a successive narration that is well publicized and well-known. In addition, there must be a report of a Sahabi respecting reckoning that individual with the Sahaba. A single Sahaba's follower's report depending upon a Sahabi's nomination is acceptably taken into consideration of being a Sahabi. Lastly, a decent man's declaration of being a Sahabi is considered.
Al-Amudi and others put decency as a provisory condition of admitting a Sahabi. Since the entire Sahaba are decent it is imperative to admit an individual's claim of being a Sahabi. Thus, a claim of being a Sahabi is measured in the very balance of claiming of decency. This is, however, unacceptable.
Coinciding in time of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is an essential base of deciding a Sahabi. That time is limited by one hundred and ten years after the Prophet's immigration to Yathrib. On that account, the imams disavowed claims after that period. A group of people were discredited in their claims of being Sahaba since their appearances proved forgery of their claims. Al-Amudi, however, decided inadmissibility of regarding such individuals as Sahaba.

Unanimously, Mohammed's advocacy resulted in establishing the state led by him for about a decade. During this period, he (peace be upon him and his family) planted regulations of the Islamic political system and clarified thoroughly the belief of Islam by applying the total hypotheses that led to propounding the general spirit of Islam.
Constitutionally, any government consists of people, a province on which those people settle and a power policing those people. Pursuant to Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani's definition of the Sahaba, the following two points are bases on which a Sahabi is considered:
1. Meeting the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) by associating, talking or viewing him. He whomever saw or was seen by the Prophet, including unweaned babies, is regarded as a Sahabi.
2. Believing in prophesy of Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family.)
Considering Ibn Hajar's opinion, it is obligatory to scrutinize everyone's creed. This matter, still, is out of humans' capacity. Al-Asqalani should have discriminated between real and ostensive believing. Abdullah Bin Ubey, for instance, is one of the Sahaba agreeingly. Yet, he is chief of the hypocrites. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at those who suggested that Abdullah would be crucially killed: “I swear we are to respect his accompanying us as long as he is among us.” Abdullah Bin Abi Sarh, as another example, was the Prophet's registrar, but he forged lies against the Prophet who, as a penalization, legalized killing him whenever found even hanging to curtains of Ka'ba. At conquest of Mecca, Othman interceded to gain cancellation of that decision. Hence, that man embraced Islam for saving his soul. Such an individual is undiscussibly a Sahabi. The same is said about Al-Hakam Bin Al-Aas who had been banished by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family.) After the Prophet's decease, the man asked Abu Bakr and Omar respectively to annul the Prophet's decision. They rejected his demand. Othman, when became the caliph, allowed him to be in Al-Madina with full honor and dignity. As a compensation, he gifted him one hundred thousand dirham, as he was a Sahabi.
Briefly, it is not a condition to regard the real believing in the Prophet's mission in consideration of the Prophet's companionship. It is acceptably sufficient to dissemble to be believing in him or keep such a pretence all the lifetime since the Prophet does not care for the hidden on any. Hiddens, however, is God's concern!
Totally, everybody had the opportunity to meet the Prophet through the solicitation, government, battles, declaration of fealty, ritual pilgrimage and Visitations, especially the Welfare Pilgrimage, and the complete domination of the Arab Peninsula. All of citizens of Mecca and At-Ta'if declared their being Muslims and witnessed the Farewell Pilgrimage with the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). that was in 10 A.H. The same could be said about tribes of Aws and Khazraj. Hence, when the Prophet was dead, no single individual was showing disbelieving in his mission. Babies, as their fathers used to take them to the Prophet for seeking blessing, became Sahaba according to the fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had seen them. Reports appertained to this matter are many. (Babies were taken to the Prophet for seeking blessings.) (Whenever a baby was born, it would be taken to the Prophet.)
The authentic reports regarding the Prophet’s being wont to walk in streets, during his leading the government he had established, without being accompanied by any guardian or the like, and wont to practice his activities himself, lead to the inevitable fact that every citizen in his state had full option to see, communicate and attend at any meeting he held. This means that the entire citizens could meet, see, hear and sit with their president.
The other Islamic sects agree with Sunnis on the lexical and terminological meanings of Sahaba. They differ with them on significance of qualifications of decency. While Sunnis generalize and unexceptionally decide the entire Sahaba as decent, the other sects figure certain justifiable prerequisites and topical qualifications for decency. Decency is imputed to those individuals who enjoy such prerequisites and qualifications only. Depending on evidences elicited from Book of God and the Prophet's traditions, they rule of those who do not enjoy such prerequisites and qualifications as indecent.

There is an assent among the Sunni Scholars upon the decency of all of the Prophet's companions. Except for some heretic individuals, as Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani expresses, none has any dispute about this view. It is essential to believe in their honesty, since it has been proved that all of them shall be in the Paradise and none, among them, shall be sent into the hell-fire. The very conception of Sahaba we have referred to during inspecting Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani's definition of this term, is meant in the previous statement.
Al-Khateeb mentions that the Sahaba's ultimate decency is evidently proved through Allah's ruling, informing and opting for their decency and integrity. The following Verses are among such credentials:
(You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men;..)*
(And thus we have made you a medium -just- nation.)
(Certainly Allah was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree, and He knew what was is their hearts..)
(And as for the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness, Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him..)
(O Prophet! Allah is sufficient for you and for such of the believers as follow you.)
(It is for the poor who fled, those who were taken out from their homes and their possessions, seeking grace of Allah and His pleasure, and assisting Allah and His Apostle: these it is that are the truthful.. Surely Thou art Kind, Merciful)
Besides, there is a great number of Verses and hadiths pertaining to this topic.
The literal meaning of the Sahaba's ultimate decency is that it is impermissible to impute fabrication, forgery or any flaw to any of those who lived or was born during the Prophet's lifetime, even if such an individual perpetrated a massacre or committed numerous evil deeds. Accordingly, the first class of the Umayids, including Abu Sufian and his progeny, and the entire sons of Marwan, including those who were banished by the Prophet, and Al-Mugheera Bin Shu'beh and Abdullah, his son who, though was only ten year old at the Prophet's decease, had written a number of the Prophet's hadiths in a volume called ‘As-Sadiqa’ -the most truthful-, are included under name of Sahaba.
Thusly, all those and others are decided as decent, and their reports in respect to the Prophet are reckoned with the most authentic hadiths even though such reports ascribe perfidiousness to Ali and the Prophet's progeny, and refer acclamation and saintliness to Abdurrahman Bin Muljim.
According to the conception involved, it is imperative to embrace such reports and, thus, it is unauthorized to repudiate since reporters were among the decent who should never prevaricate tenaciously. Depending on the claim that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had said: “The like of my companions -Sahaba- is the stars; whomever is followed, guidance -to the right path- is the result.”, the groups who pursued and kept in line with Muawiya for about three decades, including those who poisoned Al-Hassan Bin Ali to death and murdered Al-Hussein and his companions, and perpetrated abundant crimes in Kufa and other cities, all those are rightful and followers of the true guidance. The saying concerned, however, is ruled as doubtful by the most well-versed hadithists. Furthermore, Ibn Teimiyeh ruled of falsification of this saying imputed to the Prophet. Hence, it is unconvincing as a proof.
Disbelievers in the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, in least of all, are, according to the Sunni scholars, described in the following judgments:
(He should certainly be one of the miscreants, that whoever maligned any of the Prophet's companions. They are surely miscreants those who malign any of the Prophet's companions at all. Abuse is the least form of treating them.)
(It is illegal to share those who malign or vilify at the Prophet's companions in a food or a drink, or to perform the ritual funeral prayer for them.)
According to judgment of the Sunni scholars, the Prophet is a true, and the Holy Quran is a true, and whatever in it is a true, and all these facts were communicated to us by the Prophet's companions. Those who vilify at any of them, are aiming at expelling our witnesses in order to repeal the Holy Quran and the Prophet's traditions. Consequently, casting aspersions on such individuals should be an essential procedure. Besides, they should be treated as miscreants.
The Sunni Scholars mean by the term ‘Sahaba’, all those who fall under Ibn Hajar’s definition, commencing with Khadijah, Ali, Zaid Bin Haritha and Abu Baker, to the last child who saw or was seen by the Prophet. At any rate, it is favorable to take another look on Ibn Hajar's definition of Sahaba.
In his Sharhul-Burhan, Al-Maziri says:
“Not all those whom were seen, visited or met by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), even for an interest or the like, are falling under our conception of the ultimate decency of Sahaba. We, in fact, dedicate the term only to those who accompanied the Prophet, (and honored him and helped him, and followed the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful).”
As a matter of fact, the above expression refers to the general idea; lest, only those who had spent or fought for sake of God are named Sahaba. Confirmed by none, Al-Maziri's opinion was denied by a group of respectful scholars.
The following is Salah Al-Illani's replication:
“This opinion is extremely unfamiliar. Accordingly, a great number of well-known Sahaba, like Wa'il Bin Hajar, Malik Bin Al-Huweirith, Othman Bin Al-Aas and many others who visited the Prophet as formal delegations without residing for a considerable period, will be excluded from list of the Prophet's companions. Besides, those who related only a single hadith -the Prophet's tradition- and Bedouins whose period of residence -at the Prophet's- is not defined, are also excluded. Precisely, opinion of generalization -regarding all those seen, visited or met by the Prophet as the Sahaba- is the most considerable and acceptable since most of the scholars have adopted for.
First of such effects is senseless equality. According to Sunnis' conception, the Sahaba, entirely, are enjoying an equal decency. Hence, all of them are decent in the very same degree. The fighter -for the sake of God- is not different from the withdrawer. The perfectly satisfied Muslim is not different from those embraced Islam due to fear of death. The foremost is not different from the dilatory. The distributor out of his fortune for sake of God is not different from the miser. The obedient is not different from the mutineer. The well-minded is not different from the discerning child. Correspondingly, Ali (peace be upon him) who had fought for Islam and missed no single battle, is not different from Abu Sufian who had led battles against Islam, and is not different from Muawiya Bin Abi Sufian. Hamzeh, in the same way, the master of martyrs, is not different from Wahshi, his killer. Othman Bin Affan, who had been already foretold of being in the Paradise, is not different from Al-Hakam Bin Al-Aas, his uncle, the father of the Umayid caliphs, who was banished by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and his two companions. This man, as well as his son, was cursed by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). In the same way, Abdullah Bin Abi Sarah, who forged lies against Allah and apostatized and, thus, was sentenced to death penalty in absentia even if he hangs to curtains of Ka'ba, is not different from Abu Bakr. Abdullah Bin Ubey, chief of the hypocrites, is not different from Ammar Bin Yasir. These examples are quite true according to the Sahaba’s ultimate decency conception. They all are decent. They all shall be in the Paradise. None of them shall be in the hell-fire at all!!
How is it reasonable to regard the knowledgeable as same as the ignorant, the fighter as same as the retiree and the perfectly satisfied Muslim as same as the embracer of Islam for saving his soul? Is it rational to regard the killer as same as his victim? Is it rational to regard the foremost as same as the dilatory, the distributor as same as the miser, the obedient as same as the disobedient, the true faithful as same as the ostentatious, and the honest as same as the hypocrite? Is it reasonable to regard Muawiya as same as Ali?
Neither doctrine, sense nor does logic accede to such an equality. It is, as a matter of fact, an excessive unfairness and disastrous fusion that intellect denies and sound human nature does reject.
Considering lexical and terminological meanings of the term Sahaba, the entire Islamic sects have no choice other than accepting, unanimously, the fact that the term does refer to individuals who embraced Islam, whether satisfactorily or ostentatiously, and those who heard, accompanied or saw the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Discrepancy, in fact, is in the opinion of generalization. While Sunnis rule of the ultimate decency of the entire Sahaba, the other sects do neither acknowledge such an opinion nor do they agree upon such a generalization.
Generally, Sahaba are the entire people of the Prophet's state, or the Islamic nation that lived under dominion of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). This denotation is adopted by Sunnis. Hence, those Sahaba are the very individuals at whom Verses of the holy Quran were addressed and laws were applied. He whoever declares his being Muslim and speaks out the two creeds of Islam, is reckoned with Muslims and citizens of the Prophet's state. This is by reason that it is only God Who does realize hidden intendments, and it is none but Him who shall reward for embracing Islam. On bases of this belief, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was used to regarding only appearances, apart from real intendments and purposes. He left hidden aims to God. Behaviors, however, are postponed to the future, God's mercy and effects of the Islamic society, as well as situations to battles of Islam against the unbelieving groups, under commandment of the Prophet himself or the mandate leader. Evading naming any hypocrite declaratorily, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) wont to supplicate God to cover up His creatures' flaws and lead them to prosperity and the right path. Tens of Quranic Verses, however, are harshly reproaching hypocrites spreading all over Al-Madina, the capital, and ýýýýýýýýýthe surrounding villages. Such Verses have evidently uncovered concealments and disclosed their hidden malice and treated with actual events of Al- Madina.
Furthermore, there was a number of individuals, regarded as Sahaba, whose private states were identified by the Quran and, thus, they were sentenced to doctrinal provisions.
Substantial attributes for good and evil deeds were subjected by the Islamic Doctrine. Belonging to any of these two groups is depending upon individual qualifications and practices. Actualization of such attributes is their bearer's concern. All over the Prophet's life, conflict against atheism was ceaseless. As a nature, individuals always reflect their beliefs through their behaviors sooner or later.
After the Prophet's decease, each Muslim realized perfectly his situation in fields of devotion or hypocrisy. Despite the fact that the Islamic society, specially in Al-Madina, was a society of Sahaba in its terminological and lexical meaning, people did realize each other's standing. Who, however, should have secured feeling against God's penalty? What is, moreover, the meaning of (Situations are as to their latest)?
We should have no choice other than classifying the honorable Sahaba into two groups:
1. The virtuous Sahaba:
They are the righteous on whose shoulders the Islamic state was built and established. It is they who suffered mockery and harm of the unbelieving majority until God's right was manifest. They adhered themselves to God's concerns and acceded to the Prophet and those he ordered of acceding to. They kept on holding on God's line till their last moments. They are unanimously decent. This ruling is indisputably adopted by the whole sects of Islam.
2. The rest of Sahaba:
They are uneven. It is only Allah Who distinguishes them. Among them there is the boys and the hypocrites. God has ruled of siting the evil hypocrites in the lower class of the hell-fire, although they were showing being Muslims and classified as the Prophet's companions (Sahaba) according to subjective standards established by Sunnis.
In fact, recognizing the virtuous Sahaba is a matter of a highly considerable importance. Dedicately, they are those who swear exceptional allegiance to the imam. besides, they are a notable pillar of the Islamic Consultance. In addition, they are the actual accomplishers of the Islamic orders. They are the imam's descriptive government whose mission is establishing bases for accepting God's instructions and applying the Islamic Shari'a and declaring public loyalty to the imam. It is essential for the public to follow them in satisfaction and displeasure. By achieving so, survival of the masses, as well as such Sahaba, is gained, while doom shall certainly be the fate if this is not attainable.
Advantage of such a classification in such a late stage is attaining a substantial review of the past for sake of inspecting mystery beyond the Muslims' present discrepancy, dissipation of attitudes and collapse of their government. This is taken as a commencing step towards enlightening their morrow and ensuring their stepping, keeping them in circle of the legal course as the only one leading to their reunification and reestablishing of a government on bases of Islamic Shari'a, the only way for achieving eternality and evading another collapse.
It is apt to add that discrimination is necessary for recognizing the most virtuous and the most meritorious for occupying public offices.
Regarding the holy Verse, (Surely Allah commands you to make over trusts to their owners), At-Tabari points to the following idea as exegesis. He mentions that making over trusts to their owners aims at referring authorities to the most meritorious. How, then, is it possible to deliver such responsibilities to the fittest without recognizing the best and the most meritorious? It is most certainly that none preceded the Sahaba to acquainting this idea, and it is none but them whom are concerned!
Discrimination is a divine custom and one of the general constitutions of life. It is looked upon as an incentive to advancing in this life that is naturally formed, due to variance in creation, abilities, powers and understanding. It is also imposed by achievement of political and functional justice in field of finding the fittest. The legal discrimination issued by Islam is the only course for achieving such a justice, considering that discrimination as a Divine reward and encouragement.
By both the Shari'a and the general spirit of Islam, means of legal discrimination is affirmed. God says: (Allah has made the strivers with their property and their persons to excel the holders back a high degree, and to each class.) (We have made some of these apostles to excel the others.)
The legal discrimination is also determined by God even over families and tribes. In this manner God addresses at the Israelis: (In fact that I made you excel the nations.) (And certainly we have made some of the prophets to excel others, and to Dawood -David- We gave a Scripture.) (And Ismail and Al-Yasha and Yunus and Lut, and every one We made to excel in the worlds.) (See how we have made some of them to excel others, and certainly the Hereafter is much superior in respect of excellence.) (Not alike among you are those who spent before the victory and fought and those who did not: They are more exalted in rank than those who spent and fought afterwards; and Allah has promised good to all.).
Legal discrimination is necessary for identifying the fittest and the most meritorious for occupying general centers of the government. This is becoming to the Prophet's saying: (It is a treachery to God and His Apostle to assign a man as a leader of a group among whom there is a fitter.)
Logically, legally and actually Sahaba as a group are not of the same level. Even among the faithful, there is a variance in degree of faithfulness. There are different levels among the powerful Sahaba, and there are variant levels among the feeble ones. Even hypocrites are enjoying different levels of hypocrisy.
As an instance, we may cite the Prophet's following saying to those who suggested to sentence Abdullah Bin Ubey to death penalty: (We will treat him politely so long he is among us.)
According to this text, Abdullah Bin Ubey, chief of the hypocrites, is reckoned with Sahaba. He is Sahabi on the grounds unanimously established by Sunnis. We would have accepted the life stillness and the rational deadlock if we had concurred with such a conception. Although they agreed or declared their agreement upon the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, Sunnis had to confess, even partly, of inactiveness and illogicality of the conception that is, according to their declaration also, contradicting the Shariite intendment.
One of the clearest evidence on such a confession is their classifying the honorable Sahaba into several classes. Belonging to any of these classes covers the lawful and political role in accordance with the Shari'a. Question of classification is not a discretionary effort. Qualifications of such classes are cited by the Quran and the Prophet's traditions. Exploiting this point, Ibn Sa'd identified five classes of the Sahaba, while Al-Hakim, in his Al-Mustedrak, classified them into twelve classes.
The First class: Individuals who embraced Islam before Hijra -The Prophet's immigration to Yathrib-. The four caliphs are cited as examples.
The second class: The Prophet's companions of Darun-Nidwa.
The third class: The immigrators to Abyssinia.
The fourth class: The Prophet's companions of the first Aqaba.
The fifth class: The Prophet's companions of the second Aqaba.
The sixth class: The first group of immigrators who arrived in Al-Madina after the Prophet.
The seventh class: The warriors of -the battle of- Badr.
The eighth class: Individuals who immigrated in the period between battle of Badr and the treaty of Hudeibiyeh.
The ninth class: Individuals of the Razwan declaration of fealty.
The tenth class: Individuals who immigrated in the period between the treaty of Hudeibiyeh and conquest of Mecca. Khalid Bin Al-Waleed and Amr Bin Al-Aas are cited as examples of this class.
The eleventh class: The ‘released’ who embraced Islam only on the day of conquest of Mecca. Abu Sufian and Muawiya, his son, are cited as examples of this class.
The twelfth class: Juveniles and children who saw the Prophet on the day of conquest of Mecca.
Hence, the first Muslim is Khadija followed by Ali (peace be upon him). (On Monday, the Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, was prophesied. On Tuesday, Ali, Zeid Bin Haritheh and Abu Bakr embraced Islam respectively.)
As a matter of fact, classification of the Sahaba into various classes is seen as an actual entry to legal discrimination. Indeed, it will be unreasonable to regard the foremost in embracing Islam as same degree of decency as a ‘released’ who declared his being a Muslim on the say of conquest of Mecca. Al-Faruq -Omar Bin Al-Khattab- directed attention towards this very point during distributing the grants among Muslims. He took the classes to which each individual belonged in consideration. So, he neither treated the foremost in Islam as equal to the latest nor did he equate those who spared no single arts in field of fighting against Islam till they were surrounded in the island of polytheism, with those who missed no single battle for the sake of Islam till God fortified His religion. Moreover, evidence of the Muhajirs -immigrators from Mecca- against the Ansar -supporters of Al-Madina- in the question of the most meritorious to leadership of Muslims after the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), which was arisen in the Saqeefa of Bani Sa'ideh, is that they, the Muhajirs, had been the foremost in worshipping God by Islam. They also stated that they had been the Prophet's backers, clan, and hence, the most meritorious of his heritage. They also stated that it should be unjust for any to dispute them in this question since the Arab should be dissatisfied if the Ansar would take leadership while the Prophet of the nation is belonging to another group. They stated that the Arab should not be satisfied unless leadership would be the Prophet's clan's.
Is it not acceptable to conclude from Omar's saying: (Who dares to dispute us in Mohammed's heritage and authority while we are his people and clan?

, in the Saqeefa of Bani Sa'ideh, backed by Abu Bakr, that it is an accurate conceptual application of legal discrimination and, in turns, it is a radical blast to the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception?
Back to the story, the Ansar could find nothing other than submitting to this indisputable evidence; therefore, they declared that they would accept none but Ali.
As Imam Ali faced them in his substantial evidence after their declaring fealty to Abu Bakr as the caliph, Bashir Bin S'ad, who was the main reason beyond the Ansar' discordance, addressed at Ali: “No any two would have litigated about your rightfulness -in matter of leadership- if only you had made the Ansar hear your previous words before they declared fealty to Abu Bakr.) Without applying legal discrimination as a means of preceding the most learned, the best and the fittest in the entire fields of life, such contentment should never be attained. Absolutely, legal discrimination policy contravenes the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception since such a policy and a course would be nonexistent when the all are equally decent.
In order to evade dissension and discrepancy, discount the role of temper and fancies and deprecate any tyrant essay to be imposed on the nation, Islam, through undeniable and artless texts, defined the basic pillars of approach of discrimination. These bases are circumscribed in five pillars for the purpose of defining paths to virtue and justice and courses to fields of goodness. Throughout such points, Muslim's position, role and size shall be evidently outlined. Besides, these points shall be the legal answer of any question appertained to individuals' standings and values. They are, then, the only way through which the most learned, the most favorable and the fittest shall be apparently recognized. What is the objective, then, beyond issuing approach of discrimination when the Prophet's companions as a whole are unexceptionally equal? What is the objective beyond instituting doctrinal provisions and issuing rulings and judges, then?
Throughout an extrapolative study of the Islamic divine belief, it is clear to conclude that approach of discrimination is grounded on five pillars considered as legal standards exhibiting the estimation and the status of each Muslim:
The first pillar is the immaculate kinship to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). It is, by undiscussible legal texts, the spiritual and political successive leadership of the nation. Concerning the answer of the wonderment why they have been dedicately selected, we can say nothing more than it is the grace of Allah that He grants to whomever He desires. In the same way, alike questions can be put about Mohammed's being chosen for the divine revelation and mission. The same can be said about Moses' being chosen as prophet. The answer will be the same; it is the grace of Allah that He grants whomever He desires. These are, anyhow, concerns of God.
The kinship involved is regarded, according to divine texts, as the center, ‘the saving boat’, ‘the door of forgiveness’, ‘the stars of guidance to the right’, ‘the foremost to faithfulness’, ‘the godliest’, ‘the most knowledgeable’ and ‘the most misfortunate’. They are, according to divine texts too, those whose commitment is imposed upon everybody. Their chief is the legal leader of the nation at any time he is in. He is, thus, the authority of people. This is according to the logic fact that the prophet is preferred to the mission with which he is sent, and the guide is preferred to the matter he is guiding to. How should God send a messenger without a message? At which situation did God reveal a Divine Book to other than one of His slaves? This is to be proved later on. They, the Prophet's progeny, are the core and the essence of the divine leadership.
The second pillar is precedence to believing in the Prophet.
The third pillar is devoutness.
The fourth pillar is knowledgeability.
The fifth pillar is the Prophet's -or the legal leader's- nominating his successor. He is the one elected by the masses fully satisfactorily, without coercion, inducement or duplicity!
These criteria are actually topical, originated, exclusively, from the Divine Islamic law. They are manifestation of each individual's credentials of decency. Respectfully, other criteria are not more than a form of harmony between an imposed actuality and a divine ordained ensample. The criteria involved are recognized by every body. In the historical policy of caliphate, these criteria were the foremost and most acceptable argument. The following situations of Abu Bakr, Omar and Abu Ubeideh, in the conference of Saqeefeh, are good examples of our discussion. These three individuals expressed their precedence in succeeding Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family) since:
1. The Arab reject delivering leadership to people other than those from among whom prophesy appeared.
2. Mohammed's people and clan are the most preferable in his heritage and authorities. This is the very criterion of kinship.
3. They claimed of their being the first individuals who had worshipped Allah in this world. This is the criteria of precedence to believing and devotion...etc.
Omar's course in distributing the imports can be added to examples of taking the previous five criteria in consideration.
Considering the Sahaba, as a whole, are equally decent, shall be in the Paradise, none of them shall be in the hell-fire at all and are equally treated by God; what, then, intercepted the Ansar from having leadership of the Muslims? Why did most of them satisfactorily concede leadership to the three Muhajirs? Why did Omar, the just caliph, follow a policy of discrimination in distributing imports of the state on the Muslims? Why were some of Sahaba sentenced to various doctrinal provisions? Lastly, how should the just decent individual, whose pass to the Paradise is already guaranteed, thieve?!
You, who embrace the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, are not more knowledgeable than the two Sheiks -Abu Bakr and Omar-. For you, their opinions are ruled as sufficiently satisfactory. I challenge each of you to find, or to try to find, answers to the previous questions. How should the impetuous pursuance be a path to the right? God did learn us that the impetuous pursuance should be the way to the Fire. He, the Exalted, graces us with the intellect so that we will use in obedience and exploring aims of the Islamic laws.
Formally, the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, adopted by Sunnis, is, generally, refuted from two faces:
The Holy Quran is, indisputably, the (Reminder) intended in God's saying: (Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardians). The Prophet's traditions are, beyond any dispute, explanations and interpretation of the (Reminder.) God, the tremendously Almighty, has committed Himself of guarding that Reminder all over times. In this manner, guardianship of the Reminder is divinely guaranteed. The honorable Sahaba are not involved in such a guarantee or guardianship. Without need to witnesses, this religion is under guardianship and consonant since Allah is the witness and He is the guardian and the explainer. Only after God's perfecting the religion and completing the divine grace, The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) moved to his Elevated Associate.
Mohammed, hence, is the witness on Muslims. Muslims of every time are the witnesses on people of their time. Likewise, the Book is revealed from God and none, to any extent, can add, change or erase any single letter. This is because it is a divine arrangement.
Along with the revelation of any group of the Quranic Verses, there was the divine guidance concerning position of these Verses in the Quran book. At the Prophet's decease, the Quran, as a whole, was arranged as exactly as we have now. It was thoroughly written, not only in hearts of men, -as some brothers claim- but also on papers. View of the Sahaba's ultimate decency shall not add anything to the consonant or the defended thing and, in the same way, view of the only sincere Sahaba’s decency shall neither vibrate nor influence consonance or safe. It is really unreasonable for them to discuss matter of the divine guardianship of the Quran for the purpose of proving the ultimate decency of the Sahaba as a whole. In this manner, thanks is God's particularly, and pride is Mohammed's, his folks' and his faithful companion's, who encompassed him. As a matter of fact, the Prophet would have been killed, like many other prophets, if his folks had let him down or delivered him to chiefs of Quraish and, as a sequence, his progeny would have not suffered all those years of blockade, pains and mistreatments. By the way, I wonder where the entire Sahaba were while the Hashemites were detained in Col of Abu Talib, having from leaves of trees and their children were sucking sands due to their starvation and thirst!! It is, positively or divinely, fair to measure the detainer and the detained in the same scale? (What is the matter with you?! On which grounds are you judging?

For the following reasons, the claim of reckoning those who malign any of the Sahaba, with the miscreants, is not acceptable:
Since Islam is the last and final heavenly form of God's religion, it is presented and designed in a way enables every individual to understand it according to individual capability. Ideal understanding, however, is that fitting the legal intendment of the text so as to attain what God has exactly meant. This mission, at any rate, is not easy. It is perfectly a matter of specialization. This is why God forwards messengers with the Divine Books, and guides with the guidance. In the same way, it is the reason beyond the existence of imams and the prophets' leadership. As a result, it becomes obvious that Islam is different from our understanding of Islam which depends upon our diverse education.
Difference of opinions and variance of cognition cannot be regarded as disbelief. It is to add that there was a number of Sahaba who maligned the Prophet and criticized his justice. As an example, you may refer to Ibnul-Khuweissira's following saying: “O Mohammed! Be just. You, by God, did not seek God's satisfaction by opting for such a sort of distribution!”
The Prophet, however, did not describe him as a miscreant or a hypocrite. He only answered him with the following statement: “Woe is you! Who will be just if I am not?!”
Are the Sahaba enjoying a standing higher than the Prophet's, then? How come do you rule of ultimate decency of all of the Sahaba while the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), the leader of mankind, says: “I am but a human. I may be right or, may be, wrong?”
Sunnis unanimously agree, or might be only showing so, that the Prophet is right, and what he has come with is right, too. As long as the Sahaba were the only persons who transferred these rights to us, they are the only witnesses on authenticity of their beliefs. Those vilifying at those Sahaba are attempting to negate the Book and the traditions we are pursuing. Those are miscreants, then. You are not allowed to share those vilifiers at any Sahabi in a meal or a drink or even perform the funeral prayer for them.
Belief of authenticity of the Prophet, the Quran and traditions is indisputably considerable by Muslims with their various sects. In an equal degree, all of Muslims are belonging to the religion and bearing its eternal identity. The religion, however, consists of two major sections; the Prophet as a person, his sayings, deeds and signature, and the revealed Book of God. This is an unanimity among Muslims. Their discrepancy, in fact, is in their understanding of legal intendment of this religion. It is unacceptable to confuse the religion and our understanding of it. Religion is the constant center, and our understandings are variables. Our understandings are practically differing among individuals and groups. This depends upon degree of knowledgeability, capability of grasping, activity and deserting one's fancies.
Had it been effectual to impose a single understanding to a text, God would have imposed it and there have been unnecessary to pursue the unanimous agreement or, even, the understanding itself. With existence of more than a conception of a definite text, this will definitely incite individuals opting for various understandings of the same text to prove their claim of grasping the legal intendment, to re study severally for attaining a united conception since each text does have one meaning only. Any other theory will grant discrepancies and differences the mark of legality. Likewise, every sect will appoint a different path as its goal while the good of this nation is achieved only by their unification. As an addition it is to say that achievement of any understanding, other than the very one intended by God, does not flow in the good of any. The good of this nation is acquired only by gaining the very understanding meant by God and putting it into action.
It is impermissible for us to confuse our understandings with the religion in various intendments, whether good or bad. It is also inappropriate to dedicate the religion to our inferable understandings so firmly that we sentence those who disagree with us to punition. By opting for such actions we should be exceeding the area of following into that of legislation which is God's concern exclusively. The judgment of regarding individuals embracing contrary opinions as miscreant, and the decision of forbidding sharing them in food and drink, and performing the funeral prayers for their bodies, are inadmitted by religion. Such judgments are ruled as groundless punition and an aggression against others' properties. Furthermore, they are basically void and valueless.
Islam is a distinct term of a definite meaning. It is:
1. Mohammed, the Prophet, as a person, his words, deeds and signature. Likewise, it is the Holy Quran with its two aspects; theory and practice. These aspects are forming the total exemplary juristic structures that God revealed to His Prophet who, in turns, explained to people. It is the divine creed intended, by Allah, to be religion of the obedient creatures. It is an idiosyncratic denotation.
2. The virtuous Sahaba who pursued the religion and acceded to the Prophet in his divine missive and establishment of the Islamic government. Neither being the religion itself nor a pillar part of it, they are mere followers.
3. The Muslims who followed and aspired to Islam. Considering them as more than followers, Muslims are not Islam itself. There is a great distance between belief and individuals embracing. The same is said about law and people and, in the same way, judges and the judged.
Benefits of Islam and Muslims is achieved by understanding the genuine intendment of the Islamic doctrine, that is exactly intended by Allah, the Elevated. Conceiving such an intendment, which is the demand of every person, requires specialization and individual talents. Unfortunately, there are some individuals who occupied others' fields and attempted, peacefully or coercively, at imposing their false conclusions on people. Furthermore, they locked the way to inspecting and searching for the true intendment, and they ruled of atheism of those who contradict them as they judged that their elicitation is the religion itself.
They, however, are not rightful to declare so since there is a great difference between religion, as a belief, and them, as individuals. It is to add that contradicting such individuals has no relation to contradiction of the religion. Opting for such a false perception is regarded as deciding the proofless choice and as an impermissive custody. This will definitely make the whole process a form of utilizing the religion for covering up and protecting a certain belief or conception.
Precisely, contrariety about the understanding of a text does not lead to apostasy of somebody or godliness of another. Such a conception is judged as a proofless preponderance and a baseless outrage. It flows only in the arteries of those who dominated the Islamic nation by discriminating them into various groups and sects using means of dishonest political trickeries. This was done by aid of the ill scholars of this nation who used to stand against consensus and unification of Muslims. It is they who used various names and attributes to the Muslims; such as unbelievers, Sunnis, Shias and the like. Even the unbelievers of the Scriptuaries disdained the naughty matters of discrimination that is detested by sound sense and pure nature. At any rate, it does show the narrow-mindedness of those opting for, and does contravene principals of Islamic fraternity and its general spirit.
The literal degree of oddity and detestability of excessive enthusiasm is recognized by God alone. In his thesis about the most authentic narrators of hadiths, At-Thehbi says:
Abu Omar Bin Abdil-Berr says: It was narrated that Mohammed Bin Weddah had said: “I sought Yahya Bin Mu'in's opinion about Ashafi'i. -Yahya Bin Mu'in is one of the most considerable scholars of evaluating narrators of hadiths and traditions whose opinion is highly taken into account and ruled as a decisive evidence-. He answered that Ashafi'i is distrustful! Regarding Ja'far Bin Mohammed As-Sadiq, except for Al-Bukhari who excluded him from the group of acceptable narrators, Abu Hatem and An-Nisa'i ruled of his authenticity.”
See how Yahya Bin Mu'in, the well known scholar, denied honesty of Ashafi'i, and how Al-Bukhari denied Imam Ja'far As-Sadiq's being among the admissible narrators, while others of less standing, were considered. Imam Ja'far As-Sadiq, however, is the chief of Ahlul-Beit Sect. He is the tutor of founders of the four schools of jurisprudence. He is the unprecedented and the most celebrated savant, from whose school four thousand students of jurisprudence and hadith were graduated. Moreover, he is the sixth Imam of the Prophet's progeny whose fathers are Mohammed, Ali Zeinul-Abidin, Al-Hussein and Ali Bin Abi Talib.
Despite all these specifications, Al-Bukhari did neither regard Imam Ja'far as one of the reliable relators nor did he rule of his authenticity! Even though they are Sahaba according to the conception of Sunnis, the Imams' narratives were ignored by Al-Bukhari.
It is a common belief among Sunnis that all of the Prophet's companions are unexceptionably decent. While this conception was invented by the dominant politicians -of that time- for a specific wicked purpose, as we are to verify sooner, they could prove to feeble people that it was a pillar part of Islam and a constant principal of this divine doctrine. They could cheat those people that he should be ruled as a miscreant and should be abandoned that who attempts to disbelieve, discuss or criticize this conception.
It is undeniable that companionship of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is a remarkable honor and a high standing. According to the lexical and the terminological meaning unanimously adopted by Sunnis, all of people of the Prophet's government are included. Characteristics that defining the Prophet's companionship are:
1. Meeting the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).
2. Declaring true believing in his message. This characteristic can easily be gotten by the hypocrites, like those who spared no efforts for fighting Islam, but they declared their being Muslims when they had been fully surrounded and when the entire doors had been locked in their faces except that of Islam. God, however, alone knows the real intents.
3. Keeping on this state till death.
Those faithful believers, the ostentatious hypocrites and the unbelievers were not of the same degree so that we can ruled of their equal decency! As a matter of fact, among them there were those who showed their Islam while they were hiding disbelief and defiance. Those are the group of the Muslim hypocrites who lived with and after the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).
The Holy Quran divulged constancy on hypocrisy, treason, mendacity, dishonesty, prevarication, planning for rebellion, hurting the Prophet and disobedience of such individuals.
Beginning with expansion of the Islamic state, elevation of the Prophet's pennon, domination all over the Arabia, mastery over the entire people, perfection of the religion and crowning of God's grace till the Prophet's decease, situations of that faction of hypocrites showed no change at all, whereas the other Muslims were of discrepant standings in believing and sacrificing.
With or without political introductories, the entire individuals of the Prophet's state became Sahaba! They, as a whole, did see, or were seen by, the Prophet. They believed faithfully or ostentatiously in him and kept on such a believing to the end of their life. This conception, nevertheless, was invented in the Umayid reign before the extinction of generation of Sahaba. This is to mean that they ruled of the decency before waiting for the end!
In this manner, this mentioned conception is basically annulled.
1. This conception opposes categorical Quranic texts.
2. This conception opposes traditions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) in their three aspects; words, deeds and signature.
3. This conception opposes actuality.
4. This conception opposes general spirit of Islam, concept of the unforeseen end result and concept of cause finale.
Hypocrisy was prevalently manifested during the Prophet's age. The hypocrites were forming a considerable tangible power. They are a group of people who showed their believing in the Prophet's message and admitting, by words, the two creeds of Islam besides the very statements frequently repeated by Muslims. By uttering so, they were aiming at deceiving and mocking at Muslims. God says: (And these are some people who says, We believe in Allah and the last day and they are not at all believers. They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive.)
Manifestation of hypocrisy included deeds also. The hypocrites were performing prayers, giving alms, providing convincing excuses as they were withdrawing from battles of Islam and repeating their claims of being believers.
Sooner or later, conducts reflect substance of beliefs. Yet, intents are God's concern lonlily. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) who is, as a norm, kind, merciful and highly polite as he is the ideal of perfect human, is to deal with individuals according to their appearances and outwards conducts, entrusting intents to Allah. When they exceeded limits, the Holy Quranic Verses began to disclose the real peculiarities of such a group. The following is a number of such Verses:
(And they are not all believers. They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe.) (And when they are alone with their Shaitan they say: surely we are with you, we were only mocking.) (And they do not come to prayer but while they are sluggish, and they do not depend but while they are unwilling.) (And if they intended to go forth they would certainly have provided equipment for it, but Allah did not like their going forth, so He withheld them, and it was said to them: Hold back with these who hold back. Had they gone forth with you, they would not have added to you aught save corruption, and they would certainly have hurried about among you seeking dissension among you, and among you there are those who hear for their sake; and Allah knows the unjust.) (And they swear by Allah that they are most surely of you, and they are not of you, but they are a people who are afraid -of you-.) (And among them there is he who says: allow me and do not try me, Surely into trial have they already tumbled down, and most surely hell encompasses the unbelievers.)
As God uncovered their realities and bared their intendments, He issued His just ordinance fitting their grave offenses of lying to people and God. In Addition, God enjoined His Prophet informing them of contents, recitals and causes of this divine judgment: (Say: Spend willingly or unwillingly it shall not be accepted from you.)
What for is this decision? This was by reason that they had been deceiving God and those who believed in Him, and their claims had been false and aimed for mocking. As a result, they disbelieved in God and His Messenger in spite of their claims.
As to his responsibility, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) declared this divine judgment without neglecting its causes and recitals. Consequently, he put such facts before everybody's eyes.
Nevertheless, the Prophet, as to his perceptible nature, went on seeking God's forgiveness and guidance to the right path for such individuals. Evidently, God answered: (Ask forgiveness for them or do not ask forgiveness for them; even if you ask forgiveness for them seventy times, Allah will not forgive them; this is because they disbelieve in Allah and His Apostle, and Allah does not guide the transgressing people.)
The first example is God's saying: (And there are those of them who made a covenant with Allah; if he give us out of His grace, we will certainly give alms and we will certainly be of the good. But when He gave then out of His grace, they became niggardly of it and they turned back and they withdrew. So He made hypocrisy to follow as a consequence into their hearts till the day when they shell meet Him because they failed to perform towards Allah what they had promised with Him and because they told lies.)
This is concerning the story of Tha'laba, the destitute Sahabi, who implored the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) to seek God's bestowing him a considerable fortune. The story goes on in this form: “Woe is you, Tha'laba!” said the Prophet, “A thankful scantiness is better than an unbearable plenitude.” “By Him Who messaged you with the Truth I swear,” Tha'laba asserted, “I will settle the whole rights.”
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) supplicated God to bestow Tha'laba. Hence, the man was greatly enriched. Unwillingly, Tha'laba resisted the Prophet's demand and refrained from defraying the poor rate imposed on every wealthy Muslim. His excuse was that he had regarded the poor rate as tributes that he was not to pay. Without receiving Tha'laba's taxable sums, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was deceased. Abu Bakr, Omar and Othman, during whose reign Tha'laba was deceased, rejected receiving his poor rates.
The second example is God's saying: (Is he then who is a believer like him who is a transgressor? They are not equal. As for those who believe and do good, the gardens are their abiding place; an entertainment for what they did. And as for these who transgress their abode is the fire; whenever they desire to go forth from it they shall be brought back into it, and it will be said to them, taste the chastisement of the fire which you called a lie.)
The believer, in the above Verses, is, dedicately, Ali Bin Abi Talib, while the transgressor is Al-Waleed Bin Aqaba. It is worth to mention that this (transgressor) became Othman's governor of Kufa and Muawiya's governor of Al-Madina.
The third example is God's saying: (And who is more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah and he is invited to Islam, and Allah does not guide the unjust people.)
This Verse was reveled for the case of Abdullah Bin Abi Sarh, the governor of Egypt in the reign of Othman. He forged lies against Allah. As a result, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) judged of shedding his blood in impunity and going unrevenged even if he hangs to curtains of Ka'ba. This report is quoted by the Shafi'ite author of As-Seeretul-Halabiyyeh, Section: Conquest of Mecca. The author adds that Othman led him seeking the Prophet's securing him. That was on the day of the conquest of Mecca. By keeping silence, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) anticipated that the man would be killed by somebody. Eventually, he had to grant secure to the man as he recognized that none would kill him.
In the First example God rules of hypocrisy of Tha'laba's intendment.
In the second example God explicates that Al-Waleed Bin Aqaba is a transgressor who shall be certainly sent to where he shall never find any other choice or an exit.
In the third example God points out that Abdullah Bin Abi Sarh has forged lies against Allah and attempts to contort God's Book. He is, then, the most unjust. In addition, God shows that this individual shall be never following the true path since God shall not guide the unjust.
These three individuals are reckoned with Sahaba considering they are meeting qualifications of Sahaba lexically and terminologically. On that account, they are such decent persons that it is inapt for them to fabricate at all and they are ruled as honest who shall certainly be sent to the Paradise and none of them shall see the Hell. These matters are fortified by the facts that Abdullah Bin Abi Sarh had been Othman's governor of Egypt and one of his close viziers. The same is said about Al-Waleed Bin Aqaba who was the governor of Kufa who had performed the Fajr Prayer with four Rak'as -units of prayer- and showed his readiness to add any number according to desires of his followers. He was Othman's vizier and Muawiya's governor of Al-Madina. In due course, he shall be decided as a miscreant, that is forbidden from being shared in a food or a drink or prayed for his dead body, that whoever asperses any of those three individuals!!
Forthrightly, which one is to be believed? Is it God's Book and judgment, or is it partisan pursuance? From this cause, the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception is topically nullified because of its being paradoxical to decisive Quranic texts. Generalization of the ultimate decency of the Sahaba, as a whole, opposes and counteract the divine doctrines.
The first example is Thuthedyeh. He was one of the pious Sahaba, whose godliness and saintliness were admiring people. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), however, described him as “a man with a face of Satanic traces.” Abu Bakr and Omar were sent by the Prophet for killing that man, but they did not do it as they found him in a state of praying. Imam Ali, then, was charged for the mission. The man had left the place just before the arrival of Imam Ali. Thus, he survived.
This man was the leader of the Kharijites in battle of Nahrawan. At any rate, the man was killed by Imam Ali during that battle.
The second example is that group of Sahaba who used to meet in a house for driving people against the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Pursuant to the Prophet's orders, the house was put on fire while they were in.
The third example is Qazman Bin Al-Harth. This man fought remarkably in the line of Muslims. Before the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), attendants mentioned Qazman's courage and great role in the battle. “Indeed, he shall be in the Hell.” commented the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Qazman was dying due to heavy stabs when some Muslims congratulated him for he should be in the Paradise very soon. “Is it not that Paradise of harmaline?” mimed Qazman, “I swear I fought only for the sake of the worldly benefits!”
The fourth example is Al-Hakam Bin Al-Aas Bin Umaya Bin Abd Shams, uncle of Othman Bin Affan and father of Marwan Bin Al-Hakam.
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) cursed this individual and his progeny; “My people shall be countering anguishes on the hands of this one's progeny.”
It is related that A'isheh addressed at Marwan: “I do attest that God's messenger did curse your father while you were in his back.”
Al-Hakam was banished to Marj, a village near At-Ta'if, and prevented from entering Al-Madina city. Abu Bakr, in the same way, rejected his request of visiting Al-Madina. Othman mediated at Omar, the caliph, to let him in Al-Madina anew. The caliph rejected strictly. Having come to power, Othman canceled the Prophet's decision of the banishment. Hence, the man entered Al-Madina with full honor and dignity. Besides, he was gifted one hundred thousand dirhams. Marwan, this man's son, was assigned as secretary of the caliph. This was the main cause of eruption of the revolution against the caliph which led to his assassination and to devastation of the regime of caliphate. It is to add that Marwan had been called ‘a thread of the wrong.’
A poet used this name when he said:
To Allah I complain against a people took a thread of the wrong as their leader..
The fifth example is (Those who built a mosque to cause harm and for unbelief and to cause disunion among the believers.) Those twelve individuals, who are reckoned with Sahaba despite their hypocrisy, declared that the aim before establishing that mosque had been seeking God's favor.
The sixth example is a number of Sahaba who had been declaratorily cursed by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Al-Halabi mentions that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), for a considerable period, cursed some persons.
Al-Bukhari relates the following:
Salim, his father:
After reciting the statement of the last ritual genuflection of Fajr prayer, I, frequently, heard the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) curse some names.
As-Suyouti relates:
Ahmed, Al-Bukhari, At-Tirmithi, An-Nisa'i, Ibn Jarir and Al-Beihaqi -in his Dela'ilun-Nubuwweh- record the following narrative:
Ibn Omar related: “On the day of battle of Uhud, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) cursed Abu Sufian, Al-Harth Bin Husham, Suheil Bin Amr and Safwan Bin Umaya.”
At-Tirmithi, who ruled of authenticity of the following narrative, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatem write down the following narrative:
Ibn Omar related: “The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was wont to supplicate God against four individuals. In his Fajr prayers, he used to supplicate God to curse certain names.”
Nasr Bin Muzahim Al-Minqari records:
Abdul-Gheffar Bin Al-Qasim, Edi Bin Thabit, Al-Bera Bin Azib:
Abu Sufian and Muawiya were approaching when the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) pointed at them and said: “O Allah! Curse the follower and the followed. O Allah! Take charge of the uneven-bodied.”
The uneven- bodied is Muawiya.
Nasr, Ali Bin Al-Aqmur records:
...The Prophet's sights fell on Abu Sufian who was riding a pack animal while Muawiya and his brother were driving and leading the animal, and said: “O Allah! Curse the rider, the driver and the leader.”
Another evidence is Mohammed Bin Abi Bakr's missive to Muawiya. The following is an excerpt of that missive:
“I saw you attempt to liken him -Ali Bin Abi Talib- and you are what we know, and he is what we know. He is the most well-meaning, father of the best progeny, husband of the finest wife and cousin of the most honorable man. He is brother of that self-sacrificer on the day of Mu'teh. He is nephew of master of martyrs on the day of Uhud. He is son of the protector of the Prophet and his group. While you are the cursed and son of the cursed. Continuously, your father and you have been waylaying the Prophet and sparing no efforts for darkening God's light. For so you have been allying the arrays, spending fortunes and instigating tribes against him. On this state, your father was deceased. You did succeed him.)
In spite of his expressive reply to this missive, Muawiya neither denied his father's being cursed nor did he deny his.
All the six previous examples related to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) are contradictory to the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception. It is rational that the condemned and sentenced to death, by the Prophet, are not decent. In a like manner, those the Prophet flamed their house while they were in are not decent. Those who mock at the Paradise and fight for the sake of spoils are not decent. As well, those who are cursed, along with their progenies, by the Prophet are not decent. Those who built a mosque for the sake of harm are not decent. Ruling of decency of the previous individuals is opposite to the Prophet's holy traditions. While the blind followers posit decency of such individuals without referring to their senses, the Prophet's tradition abjure it. Which is to be believed; the Prophet's traditions or the blind followers?!
Decency of the virtuous Sahaba is unanimously acceptable. The real disagreement exists in conception of generalizing such a decency, that is thoroughly contrary to the Prophet's traditions.
The first example: Muawiya acquired declaration of fealty, as a caliph, by means of massacring, destroying, searing and reviling at the Prophet's supporters. He misused the Muslims' fortunes he had amassed during the twenty year dominion of Syria for the aim of fortifying his authorities. He invented an income distributed on the military at the nomination of a new caliph.
This trend became indisputably obvious after Muawiya's proposing his son, Yazeed the notorious lascivious and ill-mannered, as the caliph, in addition to the coercive procedures of acquiring people's declaration of allegiance.
The second example: Muawiya Bin Abi Sufian advised his son, Yazeed, to opt for Muslim Bin Aqaba for quelling any probable rebellion in Al-Madina. Muslim Bin Aqaba kept a list containing names of the most immaculate Sahaba, so that he would not miss any. In the centre of the Prophet's capital, Muslim perpetrated the most outrageous crimes. Marwan was the commander while Muslim and his militaries were the executors. Besides the merciless executions, results of this operation advised by Muawiya, can be counted in the following points:
1. The whole warriors of Badr were terminated.
2. Seventy men from people of Quraish and the Ansar were killed.
3. Ten thousand individuals from the Arab and the non Arab were killed.
These were incidents of Al-Harra encounter that occurred in 63 A.H. Abdullah Bin Omar, who had been withdrawing from the continuous conflict between Ali and Muawiya, declared the saying which was changed, afterward, into an institutional rule; “We are with the controlling.”
The third example: Muawiya assigned Bisr Bin Arta'a as the commander of three thousand soldiers and ordered him of acquiring fealty declaration of people of Al-Madina, Mecca and Yemen. It was the year 40 when Bisr ascended the pulpit and menaced people of Al-Madina with killing if they would reject declaring fealty to Muawiya. After having finished his mission in Mecca, Bisr advanced towards Yemen. As he could not find Ubeidullah Bin Abbas, the governor of Yemen, Bisr killed Abdurrahman and Al-Qasim, the two young children of Ubeidullah, and their maternal uncle. Bisr perpetrated heavy massacres in Al-Madina, between the two mosques, Al-Jawf and San'a. He killed every man descried as acceding to Ali Bin Abi Talib.
Juweiriyeh, the mother of the two young children killed by Bisr, used to circumambulate around her house with her hair dispersed, and eulogize her two children with excessively expressive words.
The fourth example: It is related that Ja'deh Bint Al-Ash'ath Bin Qeis killed her husband, Al-Hassan Bin Ali, with poison she had taken from Muawiya. The incentive beyond her ill deed was that Muawiya had promised her with one hundred thousand dirhams and selecting her as his son's wife. After the decease of Al-Hassan due to poisoning, Muawiya sent the sum he had promised Ja'deh of, but he broke the other promise saying: “We will chose you as our son's wife unless we do want him to live!”
It is related that during his dying, Al-Hassan said: “He, Muawiya, did achieve his goal; but he shall never make his words nor shall he fulfill his promise.“
Al-Abbas Bin Abdil-Muttelib related:
I was with the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) when he smiled in the face of Ali Bin Abi Talib while he was approaching. As I sought an explanation, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “O the Prophet's uncle! I do assert that Allah does love this man more than I do. The prophet's progenies are their sons. Mine is Ali's.”
People of Syria elected Abdurrahman Bin Khalid Bin Al-Waleed as Muawiya's successor. This was the reason beyond Muawiya's poisoning him. The same thing was done to Abdurrahman Bin Abi Bakr.
The fifth Example: The Grand Beatitude:
Mohammed Bin Jarir At-Tabarani, Mohammed Bin Hameed Ar-Razi, Ali Bin Mujahid, Mohammed Bin Isaaq, Al-Fadhl Bin Rabee'a:
Abdullah Bin Al-Abbas related:
I was in the mosque when I heard Muawiya recite ‘Allahu Akbar’ declaratorily. Responding this declaration, people encompassing him, recited the same statement. When people of the mosque heard so, they participated. From her place, Fakhiteh Bint Qaraza Bin Amr Bin Nawfel Bin Abd Menaf went out and wondered: “God may please you, Ameerul-Mu'mineen! What is this news that made you so jovial?” “It is the decease of Al-Hassan Bin Ali.” answered Muawiya. She was highly touched; therefore, she wept and cried: “The master of Muslims and the son of the Prophet is dead.” “The best thing you are doing.” said Muawiya, “ He was certainly as exactly as you have described.”
As soon as I was informed of the news I hurried up to Muawiya. “O son of Al-Abbas! Have you been informed of the news of Al-Hassan Bin Ali's death?” he asked. “Yes, I have. Did you recite ‘Allahu Akbar’ for this very reason?” I wondered. “Yes, it was.” Muawiya affirmed.
The sixth example: The troops led by Amr Bin Sa'd Bin Abi Waqqas, the Sahabi, advanced.. Because of the heavy numbers of troops surrounding Al-Hussein (peace be upon him), he had to fight them since he was sure he would not find an exit. He fought to death. A man from people of Mithaj decapitated Al-Hussein and took his head to Ubeidullah Bin Ziyad seeking the prize of killing that ‘deferential celebrity, son of the most honorable father and mother’ as the killer admits.
Al-Belathiri, in his Ansabul-Ashraf, relates that in addition to their robbing the apparel of Al-Hussein, the killed, horsemen executed the command of Omar Bin Sa'd, the Sahabi, of treading Al-Hussein's chest with their horses. Isaaq Bin Hubeira Al-Hadhrami and his group were mandated for this operation. Thus, they trod Al-Hussein's dead body. After having terminated the offspring of Mohammed, intercepting them from having from the near at hand River Euphrates, from which even dogs drink, Omar Bin Sa'd Bin Abi Waqqas and his troops came back bearing triumph.
The seventh example: During his meeting Muawiya, Imam Al-Hassan addressed at people of Kufa: “Saving your three acts that I can never disregard; your killing my father, robbing my gear and stabbing me in the abdomen, I would be careless for you. Thereupon I declare fealty to Muawiya.”
This occurred after he (peace be upon him) had led a twelve thousand fighter army and camped in Al-Meda'in. Aback, some of his warriors robbed his luggage and gave him up. In addition, some attempted to enchain Imam Hassan and take to Muawiya. Some, however, aimed at killing him.
Massacres, destruction, flaming, terminating the warriors of -the battle of- Badr, killing eleven thousand Muslims of the capital, Al-Madina, in a single day; all these are matters contradictory to decency.
In a like manner, murdering young children and executing every one showing, even surmisingly, Ali's affection are matters opposing claim of decency.
Correspondingly, poisoning Al-Hassan, killing Al-Hussein, truding his chest with horses, terminating Mohammed's progeny and depriving them of drinking are matters violating claim of decency.
Besides others, occurrence of such matters repeals claims of those who rule of the ultimate decency of Sahaba as a whole. It repeals, likewise, their claim of the Sahaba's being in the Paradise and being saved from the Hell. Adopting for such a claim leads to the existence of rewarding those who perpetrated actions illegalized by Allah.
Actions like poisoning Imam Al-Hassan, killing Imam Al-Hussein and terminating the Prophet's progeny and companions cannot be regarded but an aggression. It cannot be decided as a sort of Ijtihad - doing the best for gaining an acceptable manner- under any circumstances. It is logically, religiously, justifiably and topically impossible to reckon perpetrators of such murders with the decent. Any commander, even paganists, will elevatedly evade committing such crimes of killing young children in the absence of their father, like that perpetrated by Bisr Bin Arta'a. As a matter of fact, existence or absence of two young children should never affect authority of Muawiya. It is, by all means, a savage unreasonable deed. Is it, then, rational that the perpetrator of such a misdeed is reckoned with the decent? It is rational that the perpetrator of such a misdeed shall be certainly in the Paradise?
As to partisan pursuance, any strange matter is acceptable. It is, however, unacceptable in accordance to laws of the infallible Divine Doctrine.
Thus, actuality, together with incidents occurred after the Prophet's decease, does perfectly repeal the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception. Occurrences are contradictory to the conception which had been established, as we shall see, only for certain political purposes, including covering up transgression against legality and the illegal transference of power. God, however, is the Prevalent. People pursued each other in respect to this conception till it became as same as transference of fashions.
Indeed the Almighty Allah has created life, death, the earth and what is all over it, only for the purpose of discerning the best doers. This is shown in God's saying: (Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them as to which of them is best in works.) (He Who created death and life that He may try you -which of you is best in deeds.)
Consequently, This life is existed as a field of testing the creatures. This field is composed of every element in this life. Process of testing commences with the mandate connected to the intellectual discernibility and ends at death. Considering all of Sahaba are ultimately decent, infallible, honest and that they shall certainly be in the Paradise and none of them shall be in the Hell, means that they, as a whole, are out of process of mundane testing. This is indisputably opposite to the cause finale of their existence. Reciprocally, this will lead to the cessation of process of the divine testing.
Furthermore, this is opposite to the general spirit of Islam since God says: (I swear by the Asr. Most surely man is in loss. Except those who believe and do good, and enjoin on each other truth, and enjoin on each other patience.)
The providence of Muslims is committing to God's commands till doom. Any error occurs to such a commitment should result in being out of realm of Islam and, also, drawing God's ire that is invariable according to sort of errors. The criterion is taken from the end result.
Providing that a Muslim apostatizes only at the last day of his life, honesty and faithfulness of his entire previous life shall be valueless. Due to God's mercy and grace, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) does realize the morrow. On that account, he (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at the believers in his last (Farewell) Pilgrimage: “After me, turn not into disbelieving, decapitating each other!” This statement is addressed at Sahaba, in both terminological and lexical meanings.
The following are narratives respecting this meaning:
* Al-Bukhari: Ibn Abbas:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “You shall be resuscitated -on the Doomsday- barefooted and naked. Some from among my companions shall be taken to the right and to the left. Then, I will say: ‘They are certainly my companions.’ I will be answered: ‘They kept on apostasy from the moment you departed them.’ Thereupon I will repeat the words of that virtuous slave -of God-: (I was a witness on them so long I was among them.)”
* The same narrative is recorded by Muslim in the following form:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “Individuals from among my companions shall be proceeding towards me. As soon as I realize them they will be intercepted from me. I, then, will say: ‘They are my companions.’ I will be answered: ‘You do not know what they did after you.’”
* Al-Bukhari:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “-On the Doomsday- While I will be standing erect, a group of people will be advancing towards me. When I realize them, a man comes out between them and me and lead to the hell-fire. I will ask about the reason, and I will be answered: ‘They apostatized and turned to their backs just after you.’ Saving very few of them, none will be saved.”
* As to another narrative recorded by Al-Bukhari:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) related: “On the Resurrection Day, a crowd from my companions will be advancing towards me when they shall be intercepted from having from my Pool. Then, I shall say: ‘O Lord! These are my companions.’ I will be answered: ‘You do lack knowledge of what they did after you. They apostatized and turned to their backs.’”
* Sahl Bin Sa'd relates:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) says: “Peoples I do realize as same as they do realize me, shall be intercepted from keeping advancing towards me.”
An-Nu'man Bin Eyash testifies that he heard Abu Sa'eed Al-Khidri add the following statements to the same saying: “I will say: ‘They are within my people.’ I will be answered: ‘You do not know what they did after you.’ Thereupon, I will say: ‘Remote be those who altered after me.’”
* Ibn Abbas
“..People from among my companions shall be taken to the left. I will say: ‘They are my companions. They are my companions.’ I will be answered: ‘Since you departed them, they kept on apostatizing.’”
* The same is recorded by Abu Ya'qub in his Musned Omar.
* Al-Bukhari, in Chapter: Al-Hudeibiyeh Battle, writes down: Al-Ala Bin Al-Museyyeb, his father:
“Congratulations! You accompanied the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and declared fealty to him under that tree.” I said to Al-Bera Bin Azib. He answered: “O my brother's son! You do not know what heresies we contrived after him!”
* Al-Bukhari: Abdullah:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “-On the Resurrection Day- I will be preceding you to the Pool. Some of you shall be certainly driven away from me. I will say: ‘O Lord! They are my companions.’ He shall answer: ‘You do not know what they did after you!’”
* Al-Bukhari: Asma Bint Abi Bakr:
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “I will be standing to the Pool so that I will see who advances towards me from among you. Some peoples will be driven away from me. ‘O Lord! They are with me and within my people!’ I will be saying. I, then, will be answered: ‘Do you cognize what they did after you? They went on returning to their backs!’”
Ibn Melika used to supplicate: “O Allah! We do seek your protection against turning to our backs and being tested in our religion.”
These are a part of what is recorded in books of Muslim and Al-Bukhari about the subject. Evading elaboration, we neglected mentioning the plenteous narratives appertained.
From the above texts of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), it is proved that a number of Sahaba shall be altering his norms and turning to their backs and, consequently, sent to the hell-fire. Muslim and Al-Bukhari, whom are considered, by those who embrace the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, as the most authentic and respectful after the Holy Quran, are among the hadithists who recorded such narratives. How should we, then, correspond between the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception and being unquestionably sent to the Paradise, and such decisive continuously related texts of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) that are, in addition, supported by actuality?
As long as it is impracticable to harmonize between the conception and these texts, the earlier will be regarded as null. Likewise, it opposes the cause finale which is, the testing, and the spirit of Islam that is binding the upright life to the good deeds and continuity of enjoining each other of truth and toleration. This courses should be crowned only by the satisfactory end result.
In his Sharhu Nahjil-Belagheh, Ibn Abil-Hadid records:
Ibn Arafa, the well named 'Naftawayih', who is one of the most considerable hadithists, says:
“Most of sayings reckoned with the Prophet's traditions, that are appertained to excellencies of Sahaba, had been deceitfully intrigued in the Umayid reign. It was purposed for seeking those rulers' favors, considering such acts as an effort for subjecting the Hashemites. These lies were patterned in such a compiled form that it deems every Sahabi as the most virtuous exemplar of mankind. Besides, such sayings bring all sorts of virulence to those who malign or misthink of any of them. In this manner, the following is related to Anas Bin Malik: “He whoever reviles at any of my companions is cursed by Allah, the angels and people entirely. You are not to share -in a food or drink- those whoever malign or impute dishonor to any of Sahaba. You are not to perform the ritual funeral prayer for such individuals.” Many a narratives were related in this style without showing any difference between the Prophet's companions.
Regarding the God’s devotee, brother of God's messenger, chief of the Prophet's household, door to the city of Divine knowledge; Ali Bin Abi Talib, all these specifications are through categorical Divine texts. He is, furthermore, a Sahabi like others. What is, then, the judgment appertained to those who malign and impose his continuous defaming on people all over the Islamic state? What is the judgement respecting those who carried on such a decision issued by Muawiya? Will they be included in the previous narrative?
In addition, Muawiya, as he was advised by some to avoid maligning Ali Bin Abi Talib and his associates, said: “Nay, by God. I will never stop maligning and reviling at him so that children will be grown up on such a manner, and the middle-aged will become old on it!”
Muawiya gifted Samara Bin Jundub, the Sahabi, five thousand dirhams in place of forging misrepresentatively that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had informed of Ali Bin Abi Talib's having been the one intended in God's saying: (And among men is he whose speech about the life of this world causes you to wonder, and he calls on Allah to witness as to what is in his heart, yet he is the most violent of adversaries, And when he turns back, he runs along in the land that he may cause mischief in it and destroy the tilth and the stock, and Allah does not love mischief-making.)
In a like manner, Samara was gifted a bribe for publicizing the fib that Abdurrahman Bin Muljim, Ali's killer, had been the one intended in God's saying: (And among men is he who sells himself to seek the pleasure of Allah; and Allah is Affectionate to the servants.)
What for does this conception discriminate Sahaba? What for is it applied to some and neglect others of the same class?! No single sane can negate the fact that authorities of Muawiya's regime betook maligning and reviling at Ali as an action imposed on the entire people who, in any case, will undergo a part of this sin!!
In their epoch, the Sahaba and the first class of followers were not more than reporters of the Prophet's words and deeds. In epochs of plurality of sects, the Sahaba's opinions were betaken as a part of the Prophet's traditions. Hence, the Sahaba's opinions were regarded as a third source of legislation in case that a judgment of an incident cannot be inferred from the Quran and the Prophet's traditions.
It seems that founders and scholars of the Hanafite, the Malikite and the Hanbalite sects are more fanatic, in this regard, than the Shafi'ites.
Despite the fact that he was favoring and enthusing over principal of analogy, Abu Hanifa was wont to precede the Sahaba's opinions when contrasted with other items of jurisprudence. It is narrated that he said: “I will refer to the Sahaba's opinions if I lack the ability to infer from the Quran and the Prophet's traditions. In case there are different opinions of different Sahaba, I will take from any indiscriminately in order not to neglect their opinions and opt for the followers'.”
In his A'lamul-Muwaqqi'in, Ibnul-Qeyyim mentions the following:
“For imam Ahmed, sources of legislation are five: texts, Shaba's verdicts...”
The Hahafites and the Henbelites ruled of allocating the Quran's judgments to the Sahaba's deeds. This is for the reason that Sahaba would not neglect applying the Quran's judgments unless they had an evidence. Hence, whenever the Sahaba contradicted the Quran, this item must have been allocated for a specific state or manner. The Sahaba's deeds, however, are as same as their words.
It is a great remoteness between this conception adopted by Sunnis and Shias' ruling of impermissibility of referring to the Prophet's traditions, in field of legislation, unless when supported by a single Verse, at least, of the Holy Quran. They believe in the fact that the Quran is including the entire subjects; (Explaining clearly everything.) Likewise, the Quran was revealed in the tongue of the Arab that everyone can comprehend, while the Prophet's traditions were related by individuals so ordinary that they may say truth or lie.
Back the Sunni sects, they sometimes reject each other's narratives and adopted their own inference. Their disagreement reached climax when they accused each other of illegality to the degree that they ruled of legality of killing the other sects' followers.
For Sunnis, words, deeds and opinions of Sahaba are one the most perceptible sources of legislation after the Quran. As if the Sahaba's opinions are immaculately true that are revealed from the Heavens, they used to allocate the generic rules and generalize the allocate rules of the Holy Quran according to such opinions. It is well recognizable that such pictures of exaggeration in sanctifying the Sahaba are indifferent from principal of sinlessness. In this manner, this sanctification is too extensive to defer hypocrites and polytheists who showed their being Muslims coercively.
At the same epoch, this form of sanctifying the Sahaba was created and directed for conflicting jurisprudence, legislation and rites of the Prophet's household sect; the Shi'a, whose course, representing the true Islam in its entire stages and echelons, is as exactly as what they had inherited from Ali, the door to city of Divine knowledge. The twelve Imams used to say: “Whatever we say is coinciding the Holy Book of Allah. You are to disdain every word imputed to us while it is contradicting the Holy Book of Allah.”
1. Shias' acceding to the Sahaba:
Seyid Murteza Ar-Razawi says: “Shias accede to Mohammed's companions who did their best for the sake of supporting this religion and strove with their souls and wealth. Accusing Shias of maligning and regarding the entire companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) as apostates, is null and void. It is to rule of such an incorrect accusal as an informing of an unforeseen matter. It is resulted from subjection to fanaticism and sectarian extremism. Finally, it is a matter stemmed from seeking illusions and falsities.”
2. For Shias, who are the Sahaba?
All those who accompanied, saw or heard from the prophet (peace be upon him and his family) are included in the term of Sahaba. This is to mean that believers, hypocrites, the decent, the dishonest...etc., are included. The mere companionship of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is not a matter that protects against misguidance or indecency. Ranks and standings of the Prophet's companions are to be measured pursuant to individual acts and conduct. There are adequate evidences on our claim inferred from the Holy Quran and the Prophet's traditions. Besides, events are good witness of our trend of comprehensiveness of the Prophet's companionship and variant standings of such companions among whom there are the decent, who attested their covenant to God, fastened their feet in the Doctrine, made the belief flow in their arteries and acted sincerely to God. Such companions could attain the acme of perfection. They are described, by Allah, in the following Verse:
(Mohammed is the Apostle of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves -each other-; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Tavrat -Torah- and their description in the Injeel -Bible- like as seed produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands firmly on its stem, delight on the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great rewards.)
Surely they are the true believers; (The believers are only those who believe in Allah and His Apostle then they doubt not and struggle hard with their wealth and their lives in the way of Allah; they are the truthful ones.)
God issued ordinance of following and pursuing such true believers; (O you who believe! Be careful of (your duty to) Allah and be with the true ones.)
It is those who are the decent companions of Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family), as Shias believe.
Shias push themselves in the midst of debate on conducts of the aberrant Sahaba by means of free conviction. Each is measured according to his deeds. Shias never respect those who oppose God and His messenger. They declare their repudiation from those who betook their oaths as a protection against their acts of occluding others from taking path of God. Adopting this style, Shias are not contradictory to the Holy Book of Allah, the Prophet's traditions and the virtuous predecessors, in matter of discriminating the Sahaba.
3. The basic difference point:
Sunnis rule of decency of the entire Sahaba, according to both terminological and lexical meaning of this word. Shias rule of decency of those who were described as decent from among the Prophet's companions.
4. The Shias' supplication for Mohammed's companions:
The most decisive evidence on Shias' sincere loyalty and allegiance to the Prophet's companions is their famous supplication they have inherited from their Imams. They supplicate God for the benefit of the entire followers of apostles of God, and for Mohammed's companions especially.
5. The most well memorized supplication of the Shiite:
In the well known As-Sahifa As-Sajjadiya, Imam Zeinul-Abidin renders this famous supplication:
Blessings upon the Followers of, and Attesters to, the Messengers: O God, as for the followers of the messengers and those of the people of the earth Who attested to them unseen (while the obstinate resisted them through crying lies). They yearned for the emissaries through the realities of faith, in every era and time in which Thou didn't send a messenger and set up for the people a director from the period of Adam down to Mohammed (God bless him and his Household) from among the imams of guidance and the leaders of the godfearing (upon them all be peace) remember them with forgiveness and good pleasure! O God, and as for the companions of Mohammed specifically, those who did well in companionship, who stood the good test in helping him, responded to him. When he made them hear his message's argument, separated from mates and children in manifesting his word, fought against fathers and sons in strengthening his word, fought against fathers and sons in strengthening his prophecy, and through him gained victory; those who were wrapped in affection for him, hoping for a commerce that comes not to naught in love for him; those who were left by their clans when they clung to his handhold and denied by their kinsfolk when they rested in the shadow of his kinship; forget not, O God, what they abandoned for Thee and in Thee, and make them pleased with they good pleasure for the sake of the creatures they drove to Thee while they were with Thy Messenger, summoners to Thee for Thee. Show gratitude to them for leaving the abodes of their people for Thy sake and going out from a plentiful livelihood to a narrow one, and [show gratitude to] those of them who became objects of wrongdoing and whom Thou multiplied in exalting Thy religion. O God, and give to those who have done well in following the companions, Who say, Our lord, forgive us and our brothers who went before us in faith, Thy best reward; Those who went straight to the companions road sought out their course, and proceeded in their manner. No doubt concerning their sure insight diverted them and no uncertainty shook them from following in their tracks and being led by the guidance of their light. As their assistants and supporters, they professed their religion, gained guidance through their guidance, came to agreement with them, and never accused them in what they passed on to them. O God, and bless the Followers, from this day of ours to the Day of Doom, their wives, their offspring, and those among them who obey Thee, with a blessing through which Thou wilt preserve them from disobeying Thee, make room for them in the plots of Thy Garden, defend them from the trickery of Satan, help them in the piety in which they seek help from Thee, protect them from sudden events that come by night and day except the events which come with good, and incite then to tie firmly the knot of good hope in Thee, what is with Thee, and refrain from ill thoughts [toward Thee] because of what the hands of Thy servants' hold. Thus Thou mayest restore them to beseeching Thee and fearing Thee, induce them to renounce the plenty of the immediate, make them love to work for the sake of the deferred and prepare for what comes after death, make easy for them every distress that comes on the day when souls take leave from bodies, release them from that which brings about the perils of temptation and being thrown down in the Fire and staying forever within it, and take them to security, the resting place of the godfearing.

Ibn Abbas describes the Sahaba before Muawiya:
After he had asked Ibn Abbas about various matters, Muawiya asked about the real Sahaba: Ibn Abbas answered:
“O Muawiya! God, the Almighty, granted His Prophet, Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family) exclusively, with companions who gave priority to him upon themselves and their riches. They sacrificed themselves for him in every situation. In His Book, God described them: (Mohammed is the Apostle of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves -each other-; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Tavrat -Torah- and their description in the Injeal -Bible-; like as seed produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands frimly on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward.)
They secured traces of the religion and advised for Muslims to excess till paths of the religion became neat, and its pillars became rigid, and God's graces became manifest, and His religion became stable, and His signs became evident. By those persons, God humiliated polytheism, beheaded it, erased its signs and, hence, God's word became the most elevated, while the disbelievers' is the most downcast.
God's peace, mercy and blessings be on these immaculate souls and elevated pure spirits. In their lives, they were favorite to God, and after their death, they have been alive. They were the advisors of God's slaves. Before they attain the other life, they migrated to it. While they were still it this world, they fled it..” “O Ibn Abbas! Change the subject!” Muawiya interrupted.
While he was ill in Kufa, in 36 A.H., Hutheifeh was informed of Othman's having been killed and Ali's having been elected for caliphate. He asked the attendants to take him out and gather people in the mosque.
After he had been reached to the pulpit, Hutheifeh orated:
“Praised and thanked be Allah. Blessed be Mohammed and his household.
O people of Kufa! Ali has been elected for caliphate. I call you for being wary of God and acceding and supporting Ali. By God I swear, he is the bearer of truth from the beginning to the end. He is definitely the ever best personality after the Prophet.”
Hutheifeh, then, put his right palm over the left and went on saying: “O Allah! Be the witness that I do declare fealty to Ali.” He, soon afterward, asked his two sons, Safwan and Sa'd, to take him back. He asked them to be always in the line of Ali. He foretold them that there would be a number of wars broken out during which a many people would be perished. “Waste no single opportunity for sacrificing yourselves for Ali in these wars. He is, by God, the right. They are the wrong those who will oppose him.” Hutheifeh advised his sons.
Seven days, or forty according to some reports, later, Hutheifeh was deceased. His two amenable sons did implement his will. They were martyred in battle of Siffine while they were fighting in the line of Ali (peace be upon him).

Bearing no piece of arms and putting nothing on his head, Imam Ali himself came to the battle field, riding on the pack animal of the Prophet; “O Zubeir! Come out before me.”
Heavy armed, Az-Zubeir came before Imam Ali. As she was told of this situation, A'isheh cried: “O Asma! Ready for wailing for your husband!” She was relaxed only when she was told of Ali's having been bare-headed.
The two had hanged each other. Ali said: “Woe is you, Zubeir! What has made you come out against me?” “It is Othman's revenge.” answered Az-Zubeir. “God may kill the nearer to Othman's murder.” Imam Ali said, “Do you remember the day when you were accompanying the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) on his pack animal in quarters of Banu Beyadha. It is when he, as well as you, smiled in my face as I met you both. It is then when you said: ‘Ali will never give up his elation!’ The Prophet answered you: ‘No, he does not enjoy any elation. O Zubeir! Do you cherish him?’ ‘Yes, I do cherish him, by God.’ you answered. The Prophet, then, foretold: ‘It is indeed that you shall be wronging him on that day when you shall fight him!’” Az-Zubeir, here, said: “I do seek my God's forgiveness. I would have never come out for this conflict only had I remembered this foregoing situation!”
Imam Ali, then, asked him to return back to his homeland. “How come should I withdraw now, while the two opposing bows are to be forming ring of the war. This shall certainly be the unacceptable shame!” Az-Zubeir expressed his embarrassing situation. “O Zubeir! Withdraw before you will be having the hell-fire besides the shame!” advised Imam Ali.
Concisely, Az-Zubeir withdrew from that sinful assemblage. Amr Bin Jurmuz killed him few hours later.
After Az-Zubeir's withdrawal, Ali (peace be upon him) shouted at Talha: “O Abu Mohammed! What for have you mutinied against me?” “It is for Othman's revenge.” answered Talha. “May God kill the nearer to his killing.” said Imam Ali (peace be upon him) and went on, “O Talha! Have you not heard the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: ‘O Allah! Accede to whomever accedes to Ali, and oppose whomever opposes him.’ O Talha! You were the foremost in declaring fealty to me, and the foremost in breaking that fealty. God says: (..Therefore whoever breaks his faith, he breaks it only to the injury of his own soul.)”
Talha sought God's forgiveness and withdrew.
Having been shocked by withdrawal of Az-Zubeir and Talha, Marwan Bin Al-Hakam Bin Al-Aas threw his spear and hit Talha's capillary, saying: “I do not care whether I hit this or that man.” While he was dying, Talha showed his great remorse for his past misdeeds.
Some mentioned that Abdul-Melik had injured Talha in the forehead, and Marwan Bin Al-Hakam hit his capillary due to which he was killed.
In battle of Siffine, Ammar Bin Yasir said: “I can obviously see faces of brave people who will fight against falsehood, until its followers will fall in doubt. By God, we are the right and they are the wrong even if they may defeat us and take us back to Hajr.”
After he had fought in the heart of the battle field , Ammar went back to a certain place for drinking some water. A woman from the Sheiban offered him a honey mixed with milk. He shouted: “Allah is the greatest! Allah is the greatest! It is the day I am to see my lovers under these sharp spears. He had said but the truth; that honest who foretold me of this day.”
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had foretold Ammar of his being killed by the tyrant faction, and that his last drink in this world would be milk with honey. “O people!” cried Ammar, “Any one to direct to the Paradise under these dragging spears? By He, the Prevailing of my soul I swear, we shall be fighting them for the interpretation of the Quran just like that when we fought them for its revelation.”
Both Abul-Adiyeh and Ibn Jawn As-Saksaki killed Ammar. As they litigated about whose rightfulness in Ammar's spoils, the two nominated Abdullah Bin Amr Bin Al-Aas, the Sahabi, as arbiter.
Muawiya mutinied against the legal ruler. He demanded the Imam with penalizing killers of Othman, the previous caliph. “Submit to obedience of this legal leadership so that I will issue a judgment against those people who killed Othman.” Imam Ali suggested to Muawiya who rejected and betook the case of Othman's assassination as bridge to royalty. He, however, could achieve his goal. He was crowned as the Muslim's king. The whole souls were submissive to his monarchy whether by terrorism or pleasure.
In Al-Madina, Muawiya entered Othman's house where he was received by a groan from A'isheh, Othman's daughter.
“O my brother's daughter!” he addressed at her, “People gave us their submission, and we gave them our secure. We showed them a tranquillity stuffed with range. They showed us a compliance stuffed with abhorrence. Each man has his sword and realizes his supporter's place. They will break their allegiance if we break our promises. Then, we cannot guarantee the consequence. Being Amirul-Mu'minin's cousin will be certainly better than being an ordinary lady.”
At-Tabari mentions that Al-Hassan Al-Basri used to say:
“Four ill deeds, any of which is sufficiently periling, are Muawiya's. They are his using the ill-minded ones, with the existence of the Prophet's companions and virtuous individuals, as rulers of this nation till he could dominate and cancel principal of consultancy. His nominating Yazeed, his son, the drunkard who dresses silky clothes and plays on drums, as his successor. His avowing Ziyad as his brother, whereas the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had said: ‘Babies are for the bed, and the prostitutes' share is the stones.’ His killing Hijr and his companions. Woe will be him due to killing Hijr and his companions. Woe will be him due to killing Hijr and his companions.”
As if this (decent) Sahabi was not convinced of these previous acts, he attained the acme by cursing Imam Ali, the favorite of God. He led his people to this act. He issued orders of cursing Ali Bin Abi Talib from the pulpits.
Seeking Muawiya's satisfaction, officials were reviling at Ali (peace be upon him).

A majority of historians mentioned the following:
Just before the beginning of battle of Badr, the first armed encounter between polytheism and monotheism, Abu Jahl raised his hands towards the heavens and pray to God: “O God! The further from Thee and the most involved in cutting relations; Thou involve him in calamities of this battle..”
At the same time, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) raised his hands towards the heavens and supplicated: “O God! Thou shall never be worshipped on this earth if my small party is defeated today. O God! Fulfill Thy promise..”
Inspecting these two supplications, it is recognizable that both raised their hands towards the heavens.. Both implored “O God.” Both carried slogan of truth.
Abu Jahal claimed of being the nearest to God and the keeper of relations. Mohammed, in the other side, affirmed that his followers were the real protectors of the truth and the ideal connection between the Creator and His creatures. He declared that there had been promises and covenants between his Creator and him.
A wonderment: Considering both were claiming of being the truth, what for, then, were they about to fight each other? Considering both were together on the same course of Allah, which is only a united way, what for, then, were they so discrepant that they faced each other with arms?
Prospect: In accordance with criteria of mere topical debate, we have to opt for one of these three prospects or views:
1. The two parties were right. This prospect, however, is inapplicable since there is only one undoubtable course which is the right path of Allah. According to sameness of both parties' bases, they should have followed each other.
2. One of the two was the right. This prospect is expedient.
3. The two parties are wrong. For a prophet fortified by arguments and heavenly miracles, this prospect is unacceptable.
Explication: For recognizing the mere reality, it is essential to achieve the following:
1. Identifying the right.
2. Identifying the wrong.
3. Identifying the right party by means of the right itself.
4. Identifying the wrong party by same means and criteria of the right.
The solving method:
1. The existence of the right and its jurisprudential formulation. The right, here, is Islam; the Quran and the Prophet's traditions; words, deeds and signature. The jurisprudential formulation of the right is Quranic texts and the Prophet's traditions that falsehood should not come to it from any side. It is God's formulation and revelation.
2. An intellect so apt that it can consume the divine jurisprudential formulation.
3. Objectivity and pertinence. The aim should be framing thoughts with legality and achieving the very intendment of the divine texts and general spirit of the jurisprudential formulation.
4. The existence of a personality of a divine authority before whom fruits of the intellectual comprehension should be provided. This personality should be the judge in case of suggestive discrepancies. Besides, he is the organizer of capacities, guide of privileges and the true director to the right. This personality is the prophet, in reign of prophesy, and the virtuous imam defined by legal and jurisprudential bases, in succeeding reigns. He is, however, the objective criterion of right and wrong. Those who accede to Mohammed, comply to his orders and follow his instruction are the right party. Those who accede to others are the wrong party, even if they recite and retain the Holy Quran, perform the ritual prayers, fast and establish mosques. This is by reason that the constant criterion of identifying the right and the wrong in any time is affability -to the leader of the right course-.
1. Carnal desire: It is the aspiration that all matters and all texts are going and elucidated for one's benefits.
2. Partisan imitation: It is the adaptation of the out-of-date conceptions with rejection and denial of any attempt of renewing or alteration.
3. Despotic attitude: This means the belief of justifiablility and appropriateness of one's conception, and that those who disagree with such a conception are the Satan's supporters whom should be intercepted, resisted and reckoned with foes.
4. Canceling or supplanting the legitimate leadership. This occurs by opting for a leadership other than the one God has ascribed. By such an act, the dominion leader will be supported even though he is wrong.
As it has been previously mentioned, we could prove that the lexical and the terminological meaning of ‘Suhba’ -the Prophet's companionship- includes all those who met, believed or showed their believing in the Prophet's mission, provided that they kept on such an appearance all their lifetime. Sunnis, unanimously, ruled of decency of the entire Sahaba without exception. We could see also that the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception is contradictory to words, deeds and signatures of the Prophet, and the decisively jurisprudential texts of the Holy Quran. Furthermore, we could prove, by examples and means of conceivable simplification, that the conception is contradictory to the cause finale, logic of beings and the general spirit of Islam.
As a conclusion and according to legality and essentiality, we could apprehend that there are two categories of Sahaba:
1. The righteous Sahaba: These individuals are indisputably and unanimously decent.
2. The other Sahaba: There is a controversy regarding such individuals. Sunnis rule of the ultimate decency of the entire Sahaba, with no difference between the foremost to Islam and a boy saw or was seen by the Prophet. They are, the Sahaba, are entirely and unexceptionally decent. It is illicit to mention them in any way leading to any sort of criticism or maligning. He whoever takes in such a course is a sinful miscreant that every one is mandated to avoid sharing him in a drink or a food or offer the ritual funeral prayer for his soul.
Respecting Shias, they believe that the decent Sahaba are only those whose decency is judged by Allah and His Apostle. The objective legal truth is the believer's aim. The doubtless Shari'a of Islam demonstrates and guides to means of detecting the objective legal truth. Intellectual qualifications helping in achieving the aim are also gifted by the Shari'a, provided that fancies are abandoned. In consideration of their claim that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), may do right or wrong; what, then, would intercept an ordinary boy saw or was seen by the Prophet, from making a mistake or forging a lie? What is the location of that doctrinal judgment of interdicting the intellect from inspecting the truth here and there? Certainly there were those who murdered a number of Sahaba, thieved, fabricated, committed fornication and those who were submitted to juristic questions after the Prophet's decease. How should we delve into the facts of such deeds? How should we institute justice? How should people take stock of the past experiences for evading the wrong and taking in the right?
On that account, Shias give credence to decency of the virtuous companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) exclusively. They beg God's mercy for such individuals at every ritual prayer. Regarding the other companions, every person is measured as to his beliefs and conduct in field of the doctrinal duties. They, the Shias, believe that the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception is a completely political representation, originated, with all its grounds, under custody of the Umayid regime; the ‘released’. The ruling regime’s mass media helped greatly in publicizing and impressed bases of that conception which, imitatively and with variant intentions, was transferred to the succeeding generations.
Shias add: Concerning the penalization issued by the jurisprudents, as one of means of supporting the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, it is, in fact, a groundless chastisement. It is unauthorized for any to condemn a Muslim unless there is a doctrinal text legalizing such a condemnation. Hence, this chastisement is unjust and void according to the entire doctrinal standards. It does result in giving stability to the state of discrepancy in which the Islamic nation is involved, and intercepting the current generation from applying past lessons and examples for discovering obstacles dug in course to the bright future and the mentally and practically illuminated unification of this nation.
If the entire Sahaba had been decent:
Those seditious matters would not have occurred. The Islamic nation would not have been engaged in discrepancies. They would not kill each other since the decent should not commit murders. The concern of leadership would not have been robbed. Finally, caliphate would not have become a regime of royalty dominated by the strongest.
Believing in decency of the entire Sahaba is a matter of confusion, darkening and interdicting people's intellects. It is reasonable that any parties in conflict cannot be the right together. The right is opposite to massacres, seditious matters, discrepancies and assigning positions to other than their rightful.
It is inaccurate for us to accept invitations of making a new beginning after elapse of a thousand years, neglecting recognizing the rightful party so as to follow, and the wrong so as to avoid their paths. This leads to the fact that we are to waste the thousand year experiment and have a very new bare beginning. This is the exact confusion we mean. In the past, such a confusion resulted in benefiting and covering up a certain authority or individual. Now, what shall we gain from adopting such a confusion and covering up. What shall we gain from canceling a 1390 year experiment, especially when we realize that consequences of such a confusion, covering up and canceling will directly befit our religion since such operations are implemented under Islamic slogans.
After a long-time indecision, enraged groups of people rebelled against Othman Bin Affan, the third caliph, claiming of his having deviated from courses of his former associates, As-Siddiq and Al-Faruq. Thus, people of Al-Madina swore fealty to Ali (peace be upon him). Saving people of Syria governed by Muawiya Bin Abi Sufian who did not show fealty to the new caliph claiming that he should punish Othman's killers, the other provinces declared their allegiance. Muawiya rejected Imam Ali's invitation to show obedience provided that justice should be issued in the case of Othman's being killed. He used his province, Syria, as a fortress from which he began to arrange for trickeries against the Imam, declare his mutiny, shake security and constancy of the state and contrive for breaking unity up. For using so, Muawiya exploited the wealth of that province in an illegal way. He went on his trickeries causing blood to be shed and people to be scattered. At length, the Imam was assassinated. Muawiya could come to power by force. He became head of the nation within whose people there were the foremost in Islam and the Sahaba who fought against his father and him for the sake of Islam. Furthermore, he forgot or feigned forgetfulness of Othman's killers. He appointed his son, Yazeed, the notorious drunkard and monkeys breeder, the drummer, as his crown prince. Since then, power became in the hands of the strongest. Considering the saying that “Old things are old.”, domination became a Shariite means for coming to power. “We are being with the dominion.”
It is a matter of surprising and a difficult issue to believe that those who supported Ali (peace be upon him) and those who supported Muawiya were decent Sahaba whom should never be sent to hell-fire, and are sinless religious authorities. It is illicit to malign or criticize them. He is a miscreant whom should be avoided in drinking, eating or offering a ritual prayer, that whoever reviles at any Sahabi. These rules are issued by Sunnis. Moreover, it is to say that they agree upon applauding any of those Sahaba in any form or style; but you should be ruled as miscreant if you impute a flaw to any.
This impetuous contemplation had changed into a factual tradition as if being the norm of Allah and His Apostle.
Depending on criteria of scientific research, we have to opt for one of the following three prospects or view.
1. The two parties are right. (Ali and his group and Muawiya and his group.) This prospect, however, is irrational since there is only one undoubtable course to the right.
2. The two parties are wrong. (Ali and his group and Muawiya and his group.) this is also irrational since Ali, according to doctrinal texts, is the devotee of Allah. Ali is being with the right, and the right, being with Ali, moves wherever Ali moves.
3. A party is the right and the other is the wrong.
Wonderment: The two parties would not have fought each other and been engaged in discrepancies if had they both been the right. Forasmuch as they were engaged in discrepancy, they should never have reached stage of fighting and killing each other. Such discrepancies might have been solved depending on legal grounds. There, hence, would not have been such a large number of victims.
Abstract: In this manner, it is indispensable that one party was the right while the other was the wrong. Ruling of decency and sinlessness of both parties is a decision stemmed from artlessness and inadvertence. The option of armed fighting should not be adopted before achievement of the Shariite certitude. Murder is crime. Breaking up the nation is a crime. Rebellion against Shari'a is a crime too. It is impossible to regard those who commit assassinations due to conjecture or fancies, as decent who do never lie, mistake or disobey. Since the Prophet's companionship is not a divine prophesy, the general frame does not occlude the Sahaba from mistaking.
From this occurrence, for instance, how should we discriminate the indecent Sahaba?
1. Existence of the right and its jurisprudential formulation the mission of which is covering areas of deeds and intendments.
The right is present. The jurisprudential formulation of the right is Islam; the Holy Quran and the Prophet's traditions; words, deeds and signature. These things, all told, form the jurisprudential formulation that is “falsehood does not come to it from face or back.” It is the religion of Allah. He has accepted for His slaves. It is His revelation and formulation.
2. Existence of a divine authority who listens to the whole opinions and, in turn, whose decision is the conclusion at discrepancies. He should be the guide of liberties, coordinator of activities and director to the right. He is the leader.
This role was played by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) in epoch of prophesy. He nominated Ali as his successor. He stated: “He, Ali, is your leader after me. He is the leader of every male and female believer. He whose leader was I, Ali is his. O Allah! Accede to him that who accedes to Ali, and oppose him that who opposes Ali.” This is a factual truth none at all, including Muawiya himself, can deny. Later on, documentation of this truth is to be proved.
3. Inspecting the occurrences and events so objectively and topically that researchist's very goal is same as God's.
4. The intellect that can well assume the jurisprudential formulation, apply it and provide fruits of this process to the divine authority.
Ali Bin Abi Talib was the first man who embraced Islam. He is the favorite to Allah and His Apostle's brother. He is father of the Prophet's grandsons and husband of Al-Betoul. He is commander of the military operations against polytheism, the unprecedented knight of Islam and the killer of foes of the religion. He is the grand veracious and the leading distinguisher -between right and wrong-, as I am to prove by divine texts. He is son of Abu Talib, the only one who protected the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) before the immigration, and head of the Hashemites who was blocked by the entire Arab tribes in Col Abu Talib for three continuous years. This was done for a single purpose. The Hashemites should give up the Prophet and withdraw from protecting him against people of Quraish.
Muawiya, on the other side, is the ‘released’ son of the ‘released’, Abu Sufian, who led the parties and fought the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) in all of battles. He tried to assassinate the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and led armies and waves of hostility against him. He is son of Hind, the lady who, in addition to cogitating the perfidious assassination of Hamzeh, tore his abdomen and deformed his corpse. Altogether with his father, Muawiya spared no art for sake of fighting against the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) till the conquest of Mecca. In that conquest, those individuals were surrounded and could find no way other than surrender. He was one of those who are classified as the inclined-hearted category who were given a part of the alms for the sake of encouraging them to embrace Islam.
All the Sahaba who supported Ali are decent. Thanks to God, they are forming majority of the Prophet's companions and those who regretfully opposed him, such as Talha and Az-Zubeir who obeyed him satisfactorily before their decease. It is a sufficient honor for Islam to declare that there were only two persons from among the Ansar who supported Muawiya. Were Abu Bakr alive, he would support him. Were Omar, who said: “He is my master and the master of every male and female believer.”, alive he would join him. O Allah! Be pleased to them and reward them what they do desire.
Regarding supporters of Muawiya and his father, they are those involved in this research debated with the doctrinal means. They are, at any rate, the lowest class of the Sahaba, terminologically and lexically. For none but them, the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception was invented. This was for finding legal excuses to their deeds.
Al-Mas'udi records: A Syrian man was asked about Abu Turab whom is continuously cursed by the imam -Muawiya- from the pulpits. “I see he is one of the robbers!!”
Al-Jahizh records: During his journey to the ritual pilgrimage, a man was advised to be as near as possible to the Holy House of God. “So, who will come out and speak to me then?”
A man asked his companion who was saying ‘Bless be upon Mohammed and his household.’: “Who is that Mohammed? He is our Lord, isn't he?”
Thumameh Bin Ashres records: I was passing by in Baghdad when I noticed a man encompassed by a great assemblage. I rode off to see the matter. It was a man advertising for a kind of alcohol. He was alleging that that alcohol is the effective remedy of any eye disease. As I glanced at the man, I found that he had been diseased in his two eyes. “O man! Your eyes would have been cured had your advertisement been true!” I shouted at him. He looked at me and said: “O you ignorant! My eyes were not diseased here. They were diseased in Egypt!” The whole assemblage expressed their full believing in the advertiser's argument. So, I could hardly escape from their sandals that played on my body!
Another narrative: People used to attend our sessions during which we were discussing affairs of Abu Bakr, Omar, Muawiya and Ali. One day, the head and the most knowledgeable among those people showed his disgust from daily repetition of that subject. “What about your opinion, sir?” I asked the man. “About which one of them?” he asked. “About Ali.” I defined. He said: “Is he not that man, the father of Fatima?” he wondered. “Which Fatima?” I shouted. “She was the Prophet's wife, A'isheh's daughter, Muawiya's sister.” The man declared. “Well, what about Ali, then?” I asked. “A man killed in battle of Hunein with the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)!” The man said.
“They obeyed him so sincerely that he led them in the collective Friday Prayer held on Wednesday just before they reached Siffine, the battle field. They borrowed him their heads making them the fortress against him. They referred to Amr Bin Al-Aas in the claim that Ammar Bin Yasir had been killed by Ali since the latter sought his support in the battle. This obedience transferred among their generations and attained the acme when they made course of cursing Ali a norm at which they were brought up.”
This is the style adopted by such decent Sahaba in elucidating facts. It was Ali Bin Abi Talib who killed Ammar Bin Yasir!! This is the style adopted by such decent individuals for teaching people their religion and identifying Mohammed's virtuous companions; men on whose houlders Islam was established!!

Copyright © 1998 - 2019 Imam Reza (A.S.) Network, All rights reserved.