As Salaam Alaikum,

Contrary to popular beliefs, Salafis are not "exclusionists". I have met many Ahle Hadith people who were once Hanafis or belonged to some other sect before they became Ahle Hadith. They are, however, purists.

I first met them few years back when I was in college. At that time  the concept of tawhid was not clear to me. I followed religion as my parents did. I used to go to mazaars and wear tavizs to keep of the bad luck. It were the Muslims form Ahle Hadith group that pointed to me the fault in my beliefs. At first, I was angered by their thinking but, I gradually became convinced that they are right, after they showed me evidence in Quran and hadith.

Needless to say their idealist approach to solve the problems plaguing the Ummah has earned them the wrath of pragmatic Muslims, who are for more utilitarian or materialistic approach. For example, to unite the Muslims, their (Salafi's) approach will be one of eliminating the differences between various sects of Muslims altogether, rather than making Muslims forget their differences (as other Muslims would attempt to do).

Though, I don't know about Salafis in detail, they certainly don't believe "Only those names which are respected on the salafi websites are on the right path, rest all have gone astray." Although, Ahle Hadith is a relatively small group, they are certainly gaining many new adherents. I believe it is the fastest growing organisation among the young muslims in India. Though, I am not a Ahle Hadith, myself, (I am ONLY a Muslim) I don't think they deserve to be treated as pariahs (as they are being treated by many Muslims).

Zaman

Also, an interesting web-site, regarding the subject:-

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-salafi.htm - http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-salafi.ht m

Asslam-o-Aliakum

I have no problem with my Salafi or Wahabbi relatives � But I feel this post should be moved to �Interfaith Dialogues�.

Having said that � here is the view of a Sufi scholar, which could of some interest to some of you. However, I am out of this �subject�.

The word salafi or "early Muslim" in traditional Islamic scholarship means someone who died within the first four hundred years after the prophet Mohammed , including scholars such as Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi'i, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Anyone who died after this is one of the khalaf or "latter-day Muslims".

The term "Salafi" was revived as a slogan and movement, among latter-day Muslims, by the followers of Muhammad Abduh (the student of Jamal al-Din al-Afghani) some thirteen centuries after the prophet Mohammed , approximately a hundred years ago. Like similar movements that have historically appeared in Islam, its basic claim was that the religion had not been properly understood by anyone since the prophet Mohammed  and the early Muslims--and themselves.

In terms of ideals, the movement advocated a return to a shari'a-minded orthodoxy that would purify Islam from unwarranted accretions, the criteria for judging which would be the Qur'an and hadith. Now, these ideals are noble, and I don't think anyone would disagree with their importance. The only points of disagreement are how these objectives are to be defined, and how the program is to be carried out. It is difficult in a few words to properly deal with all the aspects of the movement and the issues involved, but I hope to publish a fuller treatment later this year, insha'Allah, in a collection of essays called "The Re-Formers of Islam".

As for its validity, one may note that the Salafi approach is an interpretation of the texts of the Qur'an and sunna, or rather a body of interpretation, and as such, those who advance its claims are subject to the same rigorous criteria of the Islamic sciences as anyone else who makes interpretive claims about the Qur'an and sunna; namely, they must show:

1. that their interpretations are acceptable in terms of Arabic language;

2. that they have exhaustive mastery of all the primary texts that relate to each question, and

3. that they have full familiarity of the methodology of usul al-fiqh or "fundamentals of jurisprudence" needed to comprehensively join between all the primary texts.

Only when one has these qualifications can one legitimately produce a valid interpretive claim about the texts, which is called ijtihad or "deduction of shari'a" from the primary sources. Without these qualifications, the most one can legitimately claim is to reproduce such an interpretive claim from someone who definitely has these qualifications; namely, one of those unanimously recognized by the Umma as such since the times of the true salaf, at their forefront the mujtahid Imams of the four madhhabs or "schools of jurisprudence".

As for scholars today who do not have the qualifications of a mujtahid, it is not clear to me why they should be considered mujtahids by default, such as when it is said that someone is "the greatest living scholar of the sunna" any more than we could qualify a school-child on the playground as a physicist by saying, "He is the greatest physicist on the playground". Claims to Islamic knowledge do not come about by default. Slogans about "following the Qur'an and sunna" sound good in theory, but in practice it comes down to a question of scholarship, and who will sort out for the Muslim the thousands of shari'a questions that arise in his life. One eventually realizes that one has to choose between following the ijtihad of a real mujtahid, or the ijtihad of some or another "movement leader", whose qualifications may simply be a matter of reputation, something which is often made and circulated among people without a grasp of the issues.

What comes to many people's minds these days when one says "Salafis" is bearded young men arguing about deen. The basic hope of these youthful reformers seems to be that argument and conflict will eventually wear down any resistance or disagreement to their positions, which will thus result in purifying Islam. Here, I think education, on all sides, could do much to improve the situation.

The reality of the case is that the mujtahid Imams, those whose task it was to deduce the Islamic shari'a from the Qur'an and hadith, were in agreement about most rulings; while those they disagreed about, they had good reason to, whether because the Arabic could be understood in more than one way, or because the particular Qur'an or hadith text admitted of qualifications given in other texts (some of them acceptable for reasons of legal methodology to one mujtahid but not another), and so forth.

Because of the lack of hard information in English, the legitimacy of scholarly difference on shari'a rulings is often lost sight of among Muslims in the West. For example, the work Fiqh al-sunna by the author Sayyid Sabiq, recently translated into English, presents hadith evidences for rulings corresponding to about 95 percent of those of the Shafi'i school. Which is a welcome contribution, but by no means a "final word" about these rulings, for each of the four schools has a large literature of hadith evidences, and not just the Shafi'i school reflected by Sabiq's work. The Maliki school has the Mudawwana of Imam Malik, for example, and the Hanafi school has the Sharh ma'ani al-athar [Explanation of meanings of hadith] and Sharh mushkil al-athar [Explanation of problematic hadiths], both by the great hadith Imam Abu Jafar al-Tahawi, the latter work of which has recently been published in sixteen volumes by Mu'assasa al-Risala in Beirut. Whoever has not read these and does not know what is in them is condemned to be ignorant of the hadith evidence for a great many Hanafi positions.

What I am trying to say is that there is a large fictional element involved when someone comes to the Muslims and says, "No one has understood Islam properly except the prophet Mohammed  and early Muslims, and our sheikh". This is not valid, for the enduring works of first-rank Imams of hadith, jurisprudence, Qur'anic exegesis, and other shari'a disciplines impose upon Muslims the obligation to know and understand their work, in the same way that serious comprehension of any other scholarly field obliges one to have studied the works of its major scholars who have dealt with its issues and solved its questions. Without such study, one is doomed to repeat mistakes already made and rebutted in the past.

Most of us have acquaintances among this Umma who hardly acknowledge another scholar on the face of the earth besides the Imam of their madhhab, the Sheikh of their Islam, or some contemporary scholar or other. And this sort of enthusiasm is understandable, even acceptable (at a human level) in a non-scholar. But only to the degree that it does not become ta'assub or bigotry, meaning that one believes one may put down Muslims who follow other qualified scholars. At that point it is haram, because it is part of the sectarianism (tafarruq) among Muslims that Islam condemns.

When one gains Islamic knowledge and puts fiction aside, one sees that superlatives about particular scholars such as "the greatest" are untenable; that each of the four schools of classical Islamic jurisprudence has had many many luminaries. To imagine that all preceding scholarship should be evaluated in terms of this or that "Great Reformer" is to ready oneself for a big letdown, because intellectually it cannot be supported. I remember once hearing a law student at the University of Chicago say: "I'm not saying that Chicago has everything. Its just that no place else has anything." Nothing justifies transposing this kind of attitude onto our scholarly resources in Islam, whether it is called "Islamic Movement", "Salafism", or something else, and the sooner we leave it behind, the better it will be for our Islamic scholarship, our sense of reality, and for our deen.

(By: Sheikh Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995)

I rembersome of  my relatives who are sufi asked their sufi scholars what is a shia.

The sufi scholar said. If a dog  drings from the sea the water of the sea does not become impure. But if a shia drinks water form the sea the whole sea becomes impure.

Just hope rehmat you did not drink from the sea. Make the whole water impure for the sufis.

 Since you like  to quote from sufis about sunnis. I thought i would quote some thing form your dear sufis about shias.

So all those sufis out better start be more careful what water you drink.

I am  sunni not sufi i dont have problem with a shia drinking water form the atlantic ocean.

dear brothers and sisters Salamun alaykum.I am a ne-revert to Islam after a long period of soul searching and reading. Islam is the most beautiful message of GOD.

After reading in-depth , after what happened after the demise of Holy Prophet (PBUH) , i concluded, that IMAM ALI is the rightly appointed successor to Holy Prophet and the followers of Imam Ali , have thus direct link to Holy Prophet.

Look at what Muawiyah did to Imam Ali....hundreds of people killed in Siffeen in the war against the RIGHTLY Appointed successor of Prophet. But I am amazed how my Sunni brothers and sisters just ignore this huge fact and still respect this person (muawiya)

Even if you look at the world today, True Islam is being represented by the teachings of Islamic Revolution in iran.

We have same book, same Allah, same Kaaba, same Prophet, but unfortunately, i have seen Salafis, curse and swear and label as Kafir 'other muslims". I have not met a single Shia brother or sister who will call others Kafir.

All this has led me to study Shia school deeply and I conlcuded that SHIAISM is the mainstream and the direct connection to Holy Prophet.

Another mind-boggling fact :

SON of Imam Ali, hussain gave up everything in karabala , when he was killed by Yazeed son of Muawiya.

But HOW MANY SUNNIS do we know who even respect and consider Imam hussain as a HERO of islam and condemn the killer army of yazid?

Despite the difference my shia -contacts urge me to join hands with other muslims based on our common points.

What ISLAM stays silent at this brutal Attack?

What will salafis say about this ?

Nineteen dead in suicide blast at Pakistan Muslim shrine

ISLAMABAD (AFP) - A suicide bomber blew himself up in the middle of a crowd of Shiite Muslims at a shrine close to the Pakistani capital, killing at least 19 people and injuring dozens, doctors and witnesses said.

http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=127u4il1t/M=327693.6212950.7267387.1442997/D=news/S=95959790:LREC/EXP=1117207940/A=2693407/R=3/id=noscript/SIG=10pi1r28g/*http://music.yahoo.com/">

Hundreds of pilgrims were celebrating an annual festival on Friday when the bomb exploded at the Bari Imam shrine, which is just north of Islamabad and near diplomatic and government buildings including the prime minister's residence.

"There were pools of blood everywhere and the bomb scattered body parts inside and outside the shrine. It was a very gory, sickening scene," Mohammed Amjad, a witness, told AFP.

The majority of the worshippers marking the anniversary of a 17th-century Muslim saint's death were members of Pakistan's minority Shiite community, witnesses said. In previous days the worshippers have been mainly Sunnis.

Thousands of Pakistani Shiite and majority Sunni Muslims have died in sectarian carnage in recent years through bomb blasts, suicide bombing and targeted killings. Last year 160 people died.

Police said they found a decapitated head lying on the floor of the shrine several yards away from a dead body after the latest bombing, which happened at about 11:20 am (0620 GMT).

"It seems to be a suicide attack. The investigators are going towards this," Pakistan's Information Minister Sheikh Rashid told AFP.

"It was an act of terrorism," Tariq Pirzada, a senior Islamabad administration official, told AFP, confirming that 19 people had died.

He said "there is strong suspicion" that a mutilated body at the scene belonged to a suicide bomber.

Pakistan's military ruler President Pervez Musharraf expressed "shock and profound grief" at the blast and ordered an inquiry to track down the culprits.

"The president strongly condemned the heinous act of terrorism and directed the concerned authorities to provide immediate relief and medical treatment to the injured," an official statement said.

The attack came as US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, Christina Rocca, visited Pakistan and hours before Islamic hardliners staged mass protests against alleged abuse of the Koran at the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay.

Doctors said 18 bodies and 50 wounded people were taken to Islamabad's Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences hospital, while another body and six other wounded people arrived at City Hospital.

Polyclinic, a third hospital, said 23 injured were brought in, of whom eight were fighting for their lives.

"The congregation was in progress. Around 400 people were there, when a man walked in and started towards the stage where a Shiite leader was delivering a sermon," Amjad, the witness, said.

"When the man got close to the stage there was a big explosion and there was panic all around."

Worshippers in traditional Pakistani clothing wailed and beat themselves amid scenes of chaos after the blast.

The shrine, in the village of Nurpur, is dedicated to Sufi Muslim saint Shah Abdul Latif Kazimi, known as Bari Imam, who helped bring Islam to the region.

The Sunni custodian of the shrine and two other people were shot dead near the compound in February. Both sects claim the shrine is theirs but it has been controlled by Sunnis for the past two decades.

In March, 39 Sunni and Shiite devotees died in a blast at another Sufi shrine in the remote southwestern town of Fatahpur.

Traditional practices by Sufi Muslims, who follow a mystical branch of the religion, are frowned on by some conservatives and this week a number of religious scholars criticised the Bari Imam celebrations.

A group of senior Pakistani Muslim clerics this month declared as un-Islamic suicide bombings and attacks on ordinary citizens and places of worship

Salam Brother Rami,

I don't understand your statement "

it is unfortunate that you chose shia Islam based on political motives rather than religious doctrine

In fact, she says in her post that " After reading in-depth , after what happened after the demise of Holy Prophet (PBUH) , i concluded, that IMAM ALI is the rightly appointed successor to Holy Prophet and the followers of Imam Ali , have thus direct link to Holy Prophet"

I don't know, a "link to the Holy Prophet" sounds like a doctrinal reason to me.

One more quick point...

You say that you would rather not comment on Muawiyah. Why? Don't our Sunni brothers consider him a companion of the Prophet? If he qualifies as a "Sahaba" according to Sunni doctrine then we should not hesitate to "praise his actions" and examine his life to take examples from it? Would anyone like to hear more about Muawiyah? How about other "noble" companions like Talha and Zubair? How about Marwan ibn Hakim?

Salam Rami,

I understand and respect your decision not to discuss these issues with your Shia friends. I also have Sunni friends, and I also am hesitant to discuss these issues with them as I don't want to jepordize our friendship. However, on this forum these issues do not apply and we should discuss openly. If we can't talk about these things here, then WHERE??? (after all, name of this forum is INTRAfaith Dialogue, correct?)

I agree that Shi'ism is not static, and has evolved over time. For one thing (for example), Imam Hussien (a.s.) was not killed by the Muslims on the order of the Caliph at the time of Imam Ali (a.s.). Also, the Imam's had to adapt their preaching and teaching activities to the requirements of the time and the degree of openess of the Umma to their guidance. However, the message has not changed.

You said, "

"Whether Imam Ali should have been the rightfull successor is not relavent today what occured back then is for them only each person will stand by them self on the day of judgment."

I strongly disagree with this statement. As testified by the famous hadith of Thaquanayn.

http://www.al-islam.org/thaqalayn/Occasions.htm - http://www.al-islam.org/thaqalayn/Occasions.htm

" Verily, I have left two precious things (thaqalayn) among you, one of which is greater than the other: the Book of God and my `Itrah, my Ahl al­Bayt. So watch out how you treat them after me. For, indeed, they will never separate until they return to me by the side of the Pond (of Kawthur).' "

Why are these two equated in importance? Would you say that the Quran is still relevent?

As testified above, one cannot follow the real Sunnah of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) without the guidance and direction of the Ahly al'Bayt. If you leave one, then you leave the other. This is not an exageration, but the words of our Messenger (p.b.u.h.).

By the way, will not stand alone on the day judgement. Numerous Ayat of Quran and Hadith establish that the Prophets and Imams will be Shaheed (witnesses) over their Umma, and will intercede on behalf of some of their people by Allah's permission. In addition, the leaders of misguidance, such as Pharoah, will be raised with his people and will lead them to hell. The Ahyl al'Bayt will only intercede (with Allah's permission, of course) on behalf of their supporters. That is simple logic. As a result, those who you select as your leaders has implications in the Dunya, until the Day of Judgement and in the hereafter.

one more thing...

" i have met brothers who dont mind the sahaba mentioned others who simply dont like them but dont go to extremes while others outright curse them and there are some who are consumed by these issues they care little about islam and make Ali and ahl al bayt there hole life."

Noone is saying that the Sahaba are all bad. The Shia take each companion on a case by case basis, based on his actions and do not lump them all together. Some of the companions deserve condemnation for their actions, and many others deserve praise. Even those companions who committed wrong action were not all bad, and many served Islam well during the lifetime of the Prophet and then deviated after the Prophets death. Most of the companions are like us (good intentioned, with some weaknesses and lacking complete knowledge).

Regarding making the Ahly al"Bayt consume their life, Insha Allah I am worthy to count myself among this group (although I don't deserve that position). The Ahly al'Bayt are the living example of the Sunnah of the Prophet and the Holy Quran. Love of Ahl al'Bayt is equivelent to love of the Messenger of Allah (p.b.u.h)., and love of the messenger is equivelent to love of Allah (s.w.a.). In order to enter the City of Knowledge (the Sunnah of the Prophet), one must first go through the gate (which is Imam Ali (a.s.)). If one wants to drink the pure water of Islam, one must hold firmly to it's container (the Ahly al'Bayt).

Ali Zaki wrote: You said, " "Whether Imam Ali should have been the rightfull successor is not relavent today what occured back then is for them only each person will stand by them self on the day of judgment." I strongly disagree with this statement. As testified by the famous hadith of Thaquanayn. http://www.al-islam.org/thaqalayn/Occasions.htm - http://www.al-islam.org/thaqalayn/Occasions.htm " Verily, I have left two precious things (thaqalayn) among you, one of which is greater than the other: the Book of God and my `Itrah, my Ahl al�Bayt. So watch out how you treat them after me. For, indeed, they will never separate until they return to me by the side of the Pond (of Kawthur).' " Why are these two equated in importance? Would you say that the Quran is still relevent? As testified above, one cannot follow the real Sunnah of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) without the guidance and direction of the Ahly al'Bayt. If you leave one, then you leave the other. This is not an exageration, but the words of our Messenger (p.b.u.h.).

Allah sent us the Quran and Rasul allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam), and he left The Quran and His sunnah which he taught to his community not simply his Family. It is not correct to say leaving Ahl al Bait means leaving the Quran the two are not different sides of the same coin.

Much of the Sunnah of Rasul Allah is rejected by the shia and the number of Ahadith which you have are much less in comaprison. It is becouse of this that Shia have had to rely on Qiyas (Ruling by abnalogy) rather than primary text and it is also why Shia Islam is Not static but changing since much of is relys on Interpretation.

Using that hadith as evidence is lagergly interpratation on the part of the shia, there is nothing in the hadith which says Those who rule or those whom Allah has chosen to Guide his Ummah are only from among Ahl al Bait. In fact Allah in the Quran clearly says Guidance is for everyone and those who Allah choses to Guide none will be able to lead astray.

Whoso obey Allah and the Messenger, they are with those unto whom Allas has shown favor, of the Prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they! (4:69)

"Those who strive hard in Us, We shall most surely guide them in our Ways" (29:69) and ittaqullah wa yu`allimukumullah ("Be aware of Allah, and Allah Himself will teach you" 2:282)

Guidance was never only meant for Ahl Al bait and Rasul Allah never said They are the "ONLY" ones who can lead or Guide People. In the above verses Allah literaly says I will Guide who ever Strugles to become more aware of me.

In a Hadith-e-Qudsi found in the Sahih Bukhari explaining this: The Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) has explained that the Almighty Allah has stated: "He who has caused enmity with My Wali (Friend), I give him declaration of war. Among those acts through which My slave achieves My closeness, the most beloved are the Fardh (Compulsory) acts. My slave also achieves My closeness through the Nafil (Optional) deeds, till I make him into My beloved. When he becomes My beloved, I become his ears through which he listens, his eyes through which he sees, his hands by which he holds, his feet by which he walks. When he pleads to Me for anything I definitely bestow it on him. When he seeks refuge in Me from any bad deed, then I definitely save him from it."

Guidance and Hence leadership can not be said are for Ahl al Bait alone, Islam is not a Monarchy.

If you look at islamic History Many of Islams Greatest thinkers/Scholars were not from Ahl al Bait, they were not even Arabs. Being an Arab is not a requirment for Guidance from Allah.

By the way, will not stand alone on the day judgement. Numerous Ayat of Quran and Hadith establish that the Prophets and Imams will be Shaheed (witnesses) over their Umma, and will intercede on behalf of some of their people by Allah's permission. In addition, the leaders of misguidance, such as Pharoah, will be raised with his people and will lead them to hell. The Ahyl al'Bayt will only intercede (with Allah's permission, of course) on behalf of their supporters. That is simple logic. As a result, those who you select as your leaders has implications in the Dunya, until the Day of Judgement and in the hereafter.

I am refering to the period of judgment, we will be judged by your self for your own actions no person will benefit us at that time. Intercession comes only after judgment and in most cases after punishment or even after being placed in hell.

intercession is also not only for Ahl al Bait we will be intercessors for each other and who our leaders are has no effect on intercession since it is not the leaders place to intercede simply becouse he was our leader. Ahl al bait will intercede for those they knew and those they knew will intercede for those they inturn knew and so on and so on, Being resurected as part of a certain group has nothing to do with intercession you will be seperated from what ever group you are raised with long beffore intercession arives and it is the last thing to occur on the day of judgment not the first.

Pharoah will not lead his people to hell, this is not an Islamic beliefe let alone shia! they are not going to hell for being pharoahs followers simply. they are destined to hell becouse of the evil each person comitted each person is responsible for himself. not every person who is raised with a group is necessarily from among that group it is established in a hadith that on the day there will be people resurected with a certain group who allah punished simply becouse he died with them at the time of the punishment even though he was not from among them.

After reading in-depth , after what happened after the demise of Holy Prophet (PBUH) , i concluded, that IMAM ALI is the rightly appointed successor to Holy Prophet and the followers of Imam Ali , have thus direct link to Holy Prophet.

Have you taken the time to find out what traditional Sunni scholars say on these matters, not simply what Shia say sunni's say. I recently got into an argument with a shia br over him telling what Sunni's are suposed to believe and not believe, if i was tyo repeat his claims here no doubt even those who are knowledgable among the shia would refute his claims they were so fundamentaly flawed.

Look at what Muawiyah did to Imam Ali....hundreds of people killed in Siffeen in the war against the RIGHTLY Appointed successor of Prophet. But I am amazed how my Sunni brothers and sisters just ignore this huge fact and still respect this person (muawiya)

No person can fully know what occured at that time, or what each persons intention is. The sunni traditional view on this matter is that both exercised there own personel Ijtihad But Muawiyah was wrong and Imam Ali was right.

Even if you look at the world today, True Islam is being represented by the teachings of Islamic Revolution in iran.

I dont think you are in a position to judge this, Sunni make up about 90% of the entire Muslim Population while the Shia are about 8%. Not many shia themselves would claim that iran is a true islamic government.

We have same book, same Allah, same Kaaba, same Prophet, but unfortunately, i have seen Salafis, curse and swear and label as Kafir 'other muslims". I have not met a single Shia brother or sister who will call others Kafir.

Salafis are a minority extremeist group among the Sunnis, Traditional Sunni islam is that of the Madhhabs, which is roughly 85% of Sunni Islam. Salafis make takfir of all groups so i dont see how this has anythign to do with sunni shia discussion.

All this has led me to study Shia school deeply and I conlcuded that SHIAISM is the mainstream and the direct connection to Holy Prophet.

If you base this simply on the Idea that Ali should have been the rightfull ruler than this is nothing but a political decision the sunnah of rasul allah and laws of allah are not derived from this event but the Quran and reported Ahadith.

Another mind-boggling fact : SON of Imam Ali, hussain gave up everything in karabala , when he was killed by Yazeed son of Muawiya. But HOW MANY SUNNIS do we know who even respect and consider Imam hussain as a HERO of islam and condemn the killer army of yazid? Despite the difference my shia -contacts urge me to join hands with other muslims based on our common points.

This is an obvious lie, I kindly ask br Ali Zaki to explain to the sister that Sunnis do love and respect Imam Ali, Hasan, Husain and Ahl Al bait.

And that condeming Muawiyah is not an article of faith in islam and is not required or even make a person a better muslim for doing it.

I dont know who you are talking to sister but please ask traditional Sunni Scholars about our beliefes we know them better than our Shia brothers as they know theres better than us.

Salam Rami,

" "the stars are the refuge for the dwellers of the skies. So if the stars are destroyed, the dwellers of the skies will also be destroyed. The members of my Household are the refuge for the dwellers of the earth. If they are destroyed, the dwellers of the earth also be destroyed" (Muhib Tabari in "Zakhair al-`Uqba", 17/1 and `Ali bin Sultan Muhammad Qari in "Mirqat al-Mafatih" 610/5, Egypt, 1339 A.H.)."

For a complete examination (with references from respected Sunni scholars) on identity and importance of the Ahly Al'Bayt, see

http://al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm - http://al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm

The hadith of "the two weighty things" designates a special relationship between the Quran and the Ahly Al'Bayt. So if the relationship is not as the Shia say, then what is your alternative explantion for the purpose of this hadith? What about the numerous other Hadith? (such as the prophet statement that " I am the City of Knowledge and Ali is it's Gate", etc.). What is the reason and purpose for them?

The Quran does not say of any other group that they have been "purified with a complete purification." If this is refering to the wives of the prophet, then why is the group address using the male gender (which is only appropriate for mixed or male-only group)? If the group includes the wives of the prophet, then what do we do when one of the wives of the prophet attacks another member of the throughly puried group (Imam Ali)? Whose side to we take (if they have both been purified and are fighting eachother?)

Allah(s.w.a.) is the source of all guidance. Any individual who sincerly seeks guidance will be granted it from Allah (s.w.a), there is not doubt about this. Often Allah (s.w.a.) send other human beings to guide us, instead of guiding us directly. If Allah wants us to obey someone absolutely, then that person must be free from commiting errors, otherwise, we will "follow them into hell." (which is what to be raised with your leader means, it means to be raised with the person you CHOOSE to follow and depended on for guidance, not the leader of your state/country).

Salam

Salams, br. Rami

Quoting br. rami

" ...And this is evident throughout history that many Sunni Scholars and Awliyah have been from among Ahl al Bait "

I think there is a misunderstanding here. When we are talking about the Ahl Al Bayt, we are not talking about the descendants of the prophet in general or current leaders(like Imam Khomeni) or the Ulama.

"Allah wishes to remove all impurity from you, O members of the household, and to purify you completely" (33:33).

This is talking about 5 individuals, Prophet Muhammed(p.b.u.h), Sayyida Fatima(a.s.), Imam Ali(a.s.), Imam Hassan(a.s.), and Imam Hussein(a.s) according to all Shia Ulama. The Holy Prophet(p.b.u.h) narrated Hadith Al Qisa in order to clarify this point. This hadith is recorded by many ulama, Shia and Sunni. For a full list of references, see below link.

Moreover, the wives of the Prophet all knew the intent of the noble verse, and, consequently, not one of them claimed to be from the ahl al-bayt. At the head of these [wives] were Umm Salama and 'A'isha. Every one of them narrated that the verse was specifically for the Prophet of Allah (S.A.W.), 'Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan and al-Husayn. Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, al-Hakim, al-Tabari, al-Suyuti, al-Dhahabi, Ibn al-Athir and others, have all reported their (the wives') acceptance of this

http://al-islam.org/ask/3.html#1 - http://al-islam.org/ask/3.html#1

Quoting br rami,

" A rule of Usul al Fiqh and Tafsir "do not interprate the quran and sunnah in a way that will make it contradict other parts of the Quran and sunnah". Allah's Guidance is for every person who strives for it, this is plainly said in the Quran "

I will let br Ali Zaki clarify this, but I don't think his point was to do tafsir or Usul al Fiqh. He was simply quoting other source of tafsir. Also, I think he was asking for your explaination of the Hadith ( or an alternative explanation from your perspective). As far as the Quran goes, I don't see anything in what he is saying that contradicts it. As far as the Sunnah, you will have to enlighten us as to what part of it is being contradicted.

Respectfully and with Salams,

Quoting Rami,

"To my understanding most or many Shia Ahadith are from Ahl al Bait maybe that is why You are stressing there importance, Most sunni ahadith are not from Ahl al Bait (as you define it)"

I didn't define the term, RasoulAllah(p.b.u.h) defined it. I am just relaying the information. If you would like to talk about sources and definitions, maybe this would be more productive.

" I was also including there decendants, otherwise i do not see there role and importance in our life time if we were to limit it to them alone "

I will post more on this later, when I have some time InShahAllah. This is a big subject

REGARDING THE LEADERSHIP OF IMAM ALI

I understand that our Sunni brothers respect (and give credibility to) the respected companion know as "ibn Abbas". Maybe you would be interested in his words regarding the rightful successor to the Prophet (a.s.)

. Ibn Abbas's address on Khilafah

While Ibn Abbas addressed the people of Basrah, when he came face to face with them, he said: "O people who are lost and confused about its faith, if you had given precedence to him who Allah had preferred, and if you had kept back him who Allah had kept back, and if you had kept the inheritance and the authority where Allah had kept them, then the share (in inheritance) ordained by Allah would not have devolved upon distant relatives (leaving behind the actual heirs), nor would the Wali of Allah have been deprived; and no two persons would have ever differed about a divine order, nor would the Ummah enter into any disputations about any interpretation of the Book of Allah. So now, have a taste of the evil consequence earned by your disregard, and by your own hands. And those who do injustice shall soon come to know what punishment awaits them."

SOURCE: http://www.al-islam.org/amali/8.htm - http://www.al-islam.org/amali/8.htm

Please note that ibn Abbas does NOT say if you had given precedence to him who you (yourselves had CHOOSEN), rather, he says " if you had given precedence to him who Allah had preferred." Can this be anyone other than Imam Ali (a.s.)

WHICH ONE OF THE PROPHETS WIVES WAGED WAR AGAINST IMAM ALI? (a.s.)

"He said: Abul Hasan Ali b. Khalid al-Maraghi al-Qalanisi reported to me from Abul Qasim al-Hasan b. Ali b. al-Hasan, who reported from Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Marwan who reported from his father, who reported from Ishaq b. Yazid, who reported from Khalid b. Mukhtar, who reported from al-A'amash from Habbah alArani, who said:

I heard Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman a year before Uthman b. Affan was killed, saying: "As if I see your mother al-Humayra (i.e. Ayesha) on an expedition, being led on a camel, and you all clinging to the camel's flank and tail. She is with the people of Azd (a tribe) and is supported by Banu Dhabbah; may Allah sever their feet."

Then he said: When the battle of Jamal (the Camel) took place, and people prepared to confront each other, an announcer announced on behalf of Amirul Mo'mineen, peace be upon him, saying: "No one of you shall initiate the fight without my orders." Then they arrived: their arrows and hit us. We said: "O Amirul Mo'mineen, we have been hit." He said: "Withhold." Then again, they hit us and killed some of us. We said: "O Amirul Mon'mineen, we have been killed." So he said: "Attack! With the blessing of Allah."

He said: We attached our raised lances and spears to each others', so close, that if someone were to walk, he could walk over them. Then Ali (A.S.) announced: "Take to the swords." So we began to strike at their helmets but our swords bounced off. Then Amirul Mo'mineen said: "Aim at the feet."

He said: We have never seen so many feet chopped off on any one day. Then I remembered the narration of Hudhaifa when he mentioned Banu Dhabbah as her helpers, saying "may Allah sever their feet." I knew that it was a prayer, which had been answered.

Then Amirul Mo'mineen announced: "Proceed towards the camel for it is surely Satan." One soldier wounded the camel with his spear, and another one cut off its hand, so it fell to the ground with foam spurring from its mouth. Then Ayesha uttered a loud cry and her people turned back defeated. So, Amirul Mo'mineen announced: "Do not attack those who are fallen with wounds, and do not chase those who have fled. And whoever shuts his door, he shall be in peace. And whoever lays down his arms he shall be in peace."

SOURCE: http://www.al-islam.org/amali/9.htm - http://www.al-islam.org/amali/9.htm

Salam

If you clicked on the link, you would see that on this page the chain of transmission of the hadith is given. In case is is a burden for you, here is the chain of transmission (from the page)

"He said: Abul Hasan Ali b. Khalid al-Maraghi al-Qalanisi reported to me from Abul Qasim al-Hasan b. Ali b. al-Hasan, who reported from Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Marwan who reported from his father, who reported from Ishaq b. Yazid, who reported from Khalid b. Mukhtar, who reported from al-A'amash from Habbah alArani, who said:"

The reason I give the link (instead of pasting the chain of transmission is to give the full context of the quoted passage as well as the chain without "muddling up" the form).

If you clicked on the link, you would see that on this page the chain of transmission of the hadith is given. In case is is a burden for you, here is the chain of transmission (from the page)

"He said: Abul Hasan Ali b. Khalid al-Maraghi al-Qalanisi reported to me from Abul Qasim al-Hasan b. Ali b. al-Hasan, who reported from Ja'far b. Muhammad b. Marwan who reported from his father, who reported from Ishaq b. Yazid, who reported from Khalid b. Mukhtar, who reported from al-A'amash from Habbah alArani, who said:"

Salam Rami,

"Ali Zaki, i see no point in replaying to your last post since you have not adressed the issues i raised."

You raised several issues (some explicit, and some implied) in your previous post. I'm sorry, but I don't see and questions marks (?'s). If you have a specific issue or question you would like me to address, please let me know and I will (inshahAllah) address it.

" Regarding Aisha (ra), the war was over those who killed Uthman (ra) she was not attacking Ali personaly."

Actually, what she did was worse since she was rebeling against the authority of the "Fourth Rightly Guided Caliph" (the Sunni title), which is indefensible according to the Sunni school of thought. Is this not correct?

REGARDING THE VERSE OF PURIFICATION

The verse itself demonstrates the neccesity and importance of leadership that is "free from error". you said that " It is clearly adressing the wives of the prophet." If you mean "It is clearly adressing (only) the wives of the prophet.", then why is it that numerous Sunni scholars from all Sunni schools say that the Ahly' Al-Bayt refers to the Prophet (a.s.), Fatima Zahara (a.s.), Ali (a.s.), Hassan (a.s.) and Hussien (a.s.) SEE : http://al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm - http://al-islam.org/mot/default.asp?url=14ahlbayt.htm . If you mean that it includes the wives and the 5 mentioned above, then how is it that one member of the Ahly Al'Bayt attacked the army led by another, thereby directly challenging the authoity of the Caliphate.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

We see that among the Sunni scholars, there is no agreed upon meaning of the Ahly Al'Bayt (despite much evidence in the Quran and Hadith which specify the identity of these persons). If the "leadership of the Sunni Scholars" is to be depended on, then which scholar do we follow. There are thousands of examples in the history of Sunni schoarship of major disagreements on very basic and fundemental issues in Islam. If this is the case, how can they lead?

For this reason, we must depend on the leadership of an "unbroken chain" of authority which reverts back directly to the Holy Messenger himself. The Shia scholars of today are only custodians for the authority of the Ahly Al'Bayt, and have no authority on their own. The tradions that have been faithfully preserved from the Ahly Al'Bayt are a firm foundation on which the whole of Shia scholarship rests and depends on.

Salam

The war was not over the Khalifat or replacing the Khalifah that is the reality, You claim to understand the actions of someone who was the wife of Rasul Allah whom he raised with his own hands and whom Allah chose for him and adressed in the Quran "His wives are their mothers." (33:6) exactly after saying the prophet is closer to you than your selves. Can anything ever change what Allah has said.

'Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our wives and your wives, our selves and your selves, then let us humbly pray and so lay the curse of Allah upon the ones who lie.'"(3:61) the Prophet called 'Ali, Hasan, Husayn and Fatima, and said, "O Allah! These are my family."(Muslim.)

Allah mentiond the Wives of Rasul Allah specifically was he going against Allahs orders or saying my wives are not my family by only calling Them instead?

From what i can remember non of the prophets wives were present.

33:32 O ye wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech.

33:33 And stay in your houses. Bedizen not yourselves with the bedizenment of the Time of ignorance. Be regular in prayer, and pay the poor due, and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah's wish is but to remove uncleanness far from you, O Folk of the Household, and cleanse you with a thorough cleansing.

Umm Salama related that when that verse was revealed, the Prophet surrounded with his garment `Ali, Fatima, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn, and said: "O Allah! These are the People of my House, therefore remove uncleanness far from them and cleanse them with a thorough cleansing." Ahmad narrated it in his Musnad with six chains, also Tirmidhi with several chains and he said: hasan sahih, al-Hakim, and Tabarani.

what is expressed clearly and literaly in the Quran is taken as being above or of more importance than implied or secondary meanings.

A Hadith is not taken over a verse in the Quran, nor can it be interpreted in such a way to contradict the Quran. If an aparant contradiction exists than another explanation is looked at.

You can not interprate One hadith in such a way to the exclusion of All others all the evidence relating to a particular matter must be considered.

These are simple laws for understanding the Quran and Sunnah which our scholars have used and is probably why Shia have trouble understanding Sunni position since what they look at is simple analysis and add to this our differing hadith collections.

As you know we can not leave aside any piece of evidence once authenticity is established.

The verses are first and formost adressing the wives of the prophet specificaly in 32 then Allah calls them Ahl al Bayt Himself in 33 this is the plain and literal wording of the Quran. The verse was also revealed in the house of the prophets wife, after the revelation rasul allah called Ali, fatimah Hasan and Husain under the cloack.

Regarding Umm Salamah whos house the verse was revealed in.

The Muslims were greatly saddened by the plight of Umm Salamah. She became known as "Ayyin al-Arab"� the one who had lost her husband. She had no one in Madinah of her own except her small children, like a hen without feathers.

Both the Muhajirun and Ansar felt they had a duty to Umm Salamah. When she had completed the Iddah (three months and ten days), Abu Bakr proposed marriage to her but she refused. Then Umar asked to marry her but she also declined the proposal. The Prophe t then approached her and she replied:

"O Messenger of Allah, I have three characteristics. I am a woman who is extremely jealous and I am afraid that you will see in me something that will anger you and cause Allah to punish me. I am a woman who is already advanced in age and I am a woman wh o has a young family."

The Prophet replied:

"Regarding the jealousy you mentioned, I pray to Allah the Almighty to let it go away from you. Regarding the question of age you have mentioned. I am afflicted with the same problem as you. Regarding the dependent family you have mentioned, your family is my family."

The hadith of Umm salamah further explains the versus in the Quran it does not contradict it nor does it separate the two versus.

Jibril aranged the order of the verses in the Quran so context is not a question,

Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated from her father (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), who told her that Jibril would rehearse the Quran with him (in Ramadan) once every year, and he did so twice in the year of his death. (Bukhari 6/485)

I have not said it refers to the Wives exclusevly I can not comment on authenticity or the opinions of scholars, the site provided only refrences for where the hadith is cited.

No commentary from anyone.

You seem to be ryling heavily on this site br, I need to ask about its authenticity since I am aware of forgeries in Shia books about Sunni sources, An example is a book which a shia br gave to me to read called Peshwar nights in which it refrenced many sunni sources all of which turned out to be fabricated. I can provide examples if you wish.

Al-Suyuti, al-Durr al-Manthur (6:603): [after citing the narrations of the
`Itra] Ibn Sa`d narrated from `Urwa that he said: "Ahl al-Bayt [in 33:33]
means the wives of the Prophet (SAWS) and it was revealed in the house of
`A'isha."

as salaamu alaykum wa rahmatu allahi wa barakatu bros and sis,

im a new member.congratulations for the excellent posts! im learning many things here.

im for unity within the ummah. however, i would like our wahhabi/salafi brothers to address the hadith of najd satisfactorily. i read on a salafi website that 'najd' in the hadith refers to iraq. but i am not satisfied, as i saw a reply to that interpretation. pls read bros and sis, especially our wahhabi/salafi bros:

PUNCTURING THE DEVIL�S DREAM ABOUT THE
HADITHS OF
NAJD AND TAMIM
[updated]

Kerim Fenari

bismi�Llahi�r-Rahmani�r-Rahim It is striking that not one of the great muhaddiths, mufassirs, grammarians, historians, or legists of Islam has emerged from the region known as Najd, despite the extraordinary and blessed profusion of such people in other Muslim lands. This essay offers to Muslims with open minds an explanation of this remarkable fact. The Hadith of Najd: a correction The land of Najd, which for two centuries has been the crucible of the Wahhabi doctrine, is the subject of a body of interesting hadiths and early narrations, which repay close analysis. Among the best-known of these hadiths is the relation of Imam al-Bukhari in which Ibn Umar said: �The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) mentioned: "O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen." They said: "And in our Najd?" and he said: "O Allah, give us baraka in our Syria, O Allah, give us baraka in our Yemen." They said: "And in our Najd?" and I believe that he said the third time: "In that place are earthquakes, and seditions, and in that place shall rise the devil�s horn [qarn al-shaytan]."� This hadith is clearly unpalatable to the Najdites themselves, some of whom to this day strive to persuade Muslims from more reputable districts that the hadith does not mean what it clearly says. One device used by such apologists is to utilise a definition that includes Iraq in the frontiers of Najd. By this manoeuvre, the Najdis draw the conclusion that the part of Najd, which is condemned so strongly in this hadith, is in fact Iraq, and that Najd proper is excluded. Medieval Islamic geographers contest this inherently strange thesis (see for instance Ibn Khurradadhbih, al-Masalik wa�l-mamalik [Leiden, 1887], 125; Ibn Hawqal, Kitab Surat al-ard [Beirut, 1968],18); and limit the northern extent of Najd at Wadi al-Rumma, or to the deserts to the south of al-Mada�in. There is no indication that the places in which the second wave of sedition arose, such as Kufa and Basra, were associated in the mind of the first Muslims with the term �Najd�. On the contrary, these places are in every case identified as lying within the land of Iraq. The evasion of this early understanding of the term in order to exclude Najd, as usually understood, from the purport of the hadith of Najd, has required considerable ingenuity from pro-Najdi writers in the present day. Some apologists attempt to conflate this hadith with a group of other hadiths which associate the �devil�s horn� with �the East�, which is supposedly a generic reference to Iraq. While it is true that some late-medieval commentaries also incline to this view, modern geographical knowledge clearly rules it out. Even the briefest glimpse at a modern atlas will show that a straight line drawn to the east of al-Madina al-Munawwara does not pass anywhere near Iraq, but passes some distance to the south of Riyadh; that is to say, through the exact centre of Najd. The hadiths which speak of �the East� in this context hence support the view that Najd is indicated, not Iraq. On occasion the pro-Najdi apologists also cite the etymological sense of the Arabic word najd, which means �high ground�. Again, a brief consultation of an atlas resolves this matter decisively. With the exception of present-day northern Iraq, which was not considered part of Iraq by any Muslim until the present century (it was called �al-Jazira�), Iraq is notably flat and low-lying, much of it even today being marshland, while the remainder, up to and well to the north of Baghdad, is flat, low desert or agricultural land. Najd, by contrast, is mostly plateau, culminating in peaks such as Jabal Tayyi� (1300 metres), in the Jabal Shammar range. It is hard to see how the Arabs could have routinely applied a topographic term meaning �upland� to the flat terrain of southern Iraq (the same territory which proved so suitable for tank warfare during the �Gulf War�, that notorious source of dispute between Riyadh�s �Cavaliers� and �Roundheads�). Confirmation of this identification is easily located in the hadith literature, which contains numerous references to Najd, all of which clearly denote Central Arabia. To take a few examples out of many dozens: there is the hadith narrated by Abu Daud (Salat al-Safar, 15), which runs: �We went out to Najd with Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) until we arrived at Dhat al-Riqa�, where he met a group from Ghatafan [a Najdite tribe].� In Tirmidhi (Hajj, 57), there is the record of an encounter between the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) and a Najdi delegation which he received at Arafa (see also Ibn Maja, Manasik, 57). In no such case does the Sunna indicate that Iraq was somehow included in the Prophetic definition of �Najd�. Further evidence can be cited from the cluster of hadiths which identify the miqat points for pilgrims. In a hadith narrated by Imam Nasa�i (Manasik al-Hajj, 22), �A�isha (r.a.) declared that �Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) established the miqat for the people of Madina at Dhu�l-Hulayfa, for the people of Syria and Egypt at al-Juhfa, for the people of Iraq at Dhat Irq, and for the people of Najd at Qarn, and for the Yemenis at Yalamlam.� Imam Muslim (Hajj, 2) narrates a similar hadith: �for the people of Madina it is Dhu�l-Hulayfa - while on the other road it is al-Juhfa - for the people of Iraq it is Dhat Irq, for the people of Najd it is Qarn, and for the people of Yemen it is Yalamlam.� These texts constitute unarguable proof that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) distinguished between Najd and Iraq, so much so that he appointed two separate miqat points for the inhabitants of each. For him, clearly, Najd did not include Iraq. Najd in the Hadith Literature There are many hadiths in which the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) praised particular lands. It is significant that although Najd is the closest of lands to Makka and Madina, it is not praised by any one of these hadiths. The first hadith cited above shows the Messenger�s willingness to pray for Syria and Yemen, and his insistent refusal to pray for Najd. And wherever Najd is mentioned, it is clearly seen as a problematic territory. Consider, for instance, the following noble hadith: Amr ibn Abasa said: �Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) was one day reviewing the horses, in the company of Uyayna ibn Hisn ibn Badr al-Fazari. [...] Uyayna remarked: "The best of men are those who bear their swords on their shoulders, and carry their lances in the woven stocks of their horses, wearing cloaks, and are the people of the Najd." But Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) replied: "You lie! Rather, the best of men are the men of the Yemen. Faith is a Yemeni, the Yemen of [the tribes of] Lakhm and Judham and Amila. [...] Hadramawt is better than the tribe of Harith; one tribe is better than another; another is worse [...] My Lord commanded me to curse Quraysh, and I cursed them, but he then commanded me to bless them twice, and I did so [...] Aslam and Ghifar, and their associates of Juhaina, are better than Asad and Tamim and Ghatafan and Hawazin, in the sight of Allah on the Day of Rising. [...] The most numerous tribe in the Garden shall be [the Yemeni tribes of] Madhhij and Ma�kul.� (Ahmad ibn Hanbal and al-Tabarani, by sound narrators. Cited in Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, Majma� al-zawa�id wa manba� al-fawa�id [Cairo, 1352], X, 43). The Messenger says �You lie!� to a man who praises Najd. Nowhere does he extol Najd - quite the contrary. But other hadiths in praise of other lands abound. For instance: Umm Salama narrated that Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) gave the following counsel on his deathbed: �By Allah, I adjure you by Him, concerning the Egyptians, for you shall be victorious over them, and they will be a support for you and helpers in Allah�s path.� (Tabarani, classed by al-Haythami as sahih [Majma�, X, 63].) (For more on the merit of the Egyptians see Sahih Muslim, commentary by Imam al-Nawawi [Cairo, 1347], XVI, 96-7.) Qays ibn Sa�d narrated that Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: �Were faith to be suspended from the Pleiades, men from the sons of Faris [south-central Iran] would reach it.� (Narrated in the Musnads of both Abu Ya�la and al-Bazzar, classified as Sahih by al-Haythami. Majma�, X, 64-5. See further Nawawi�s commentary to Sahih Muslim, XVI, 100.) Allah�s Messenger said: �Tranquillity (sakina) is in the people of the Hijaz.� (al-Bazzar, cited in Haythami, X, 53.) On the authority of Abu�l-Darda (r.a.), the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: �You will find armies. An army in Syria, in Egypt, in Iraq and in the Yemen.� (Bazzar and Tabarani, classified as sahih: al-Haythami, Majma�, X, 58.) This constitutes praise for these lands as homes of jihad volunteers. �The angels of the All-Compassionate spread their wings over Syria.� (Tabarani, classed as sahih: Majma�, X, 60. See also Tirmidhi, commentary of Imam Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman al-Mubarakfuri: Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi bi-sharh Jami� al-Tirmidhi, X, 454; who confirms it as hasan sahih.) Abu Hurayra narrated that Allah�s Messenger (s) said: �The people of Yemen have come to you. They are tenderer of heart, and more delicate of soul. Faith is a Yemeni, and wisdom is a Yemeni.� (Tirmidhi, Fi fadl al-Yaman, no.4028. Mubarakfuri, X, 435, 437: hadith hasan sahih. On page 436 Imam Mubarakfuri points out that the ancestors of the Ansar were from the Yemen.) �The people of the Yemen are the best people on earth�. (Abu Ya�la and Bazzar, classified as sahih. Haythami, X, 54-5.) Allah�s Messenger (s) sent a man to one of the clans of the Arabs, but they insulted and beat him. He came to Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) and told him what had occurred. And the Messenger (s) said, �Had you gone to the people of Oman, they would not have insulted or beaten you.� (Muslim, Fada�il al-Sahaba, 57. See Nawawi�s commentary, XVI, 98: �this indicates praise for them, and their merit.�) The above hadiths are culled from a substantial corpus of material which records the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) praising neighbouring regions. Again, it is striking that although Najd was closer than any other, hadiths in praise of it are completely absent. This fact is generally known, although not publicised, by Najdites themselves. It is clear that if there existed a single hadith that names and praises Najd, they would let the Umma know. In an attempt to circumvent or neutralise the explicit and implicit Prophetic condemnation of their province, some refuse to consider that the territorial hadiths might be in any way worthy of attention, and focus their comments on the tribal groupings who dwell in Najd. The Tribe of Tamim The best-known tribe of Central Arabia are the Banu Tamim. There are hadiths which praise virtually all of the major Arab tribal groups, and to indicate the extent of this praise a few examples are listed here: Allah�s Messenger (s) said: �O Allah, bless [the tribe of] Ahmas and its horses and its men sevenfold.� (Ibn Hanbal, in Haythami, Majma�, X, 49. According to al-Haythami its narrators are all trustworthy.) Ghalib b. Abjur said: �I mentioned Qays in the presence of Allah�s Messenger (s) and he said, "May Allah show His mercy to Qays." He was asked, "O Messenger of God! Are you asking for His mercy for Qays?" and he replied, "Yes. He followed the religion of our father Ismail b. Ibrahim, Allah�s Friend. Qays! Salute our Yemen! Yemen! Salute our Qays! Qays are Allah�s cavalry upon the earth."� (Tabarani, declared sahih by al-Haythami, X, 49.) Abu Hurayra narrated that Allah�s Messenger (s) said: �How excellent a people are Azd, sweet-mouthed, honouring their vows, and pure of heart!� (Ibn Hanbal via a good (hasan) isnad, according to Haythami, X, 49.) Anas b. Malik said: �If we are not from Azd, we are not from the human race.� (Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 72; confirmed by Mubarakfuri, X, 439 as hasan gharib sahih.) Abdallah ibn Mas�ud said: �I witnessed Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) praying for this clan of Nakh�.� Or he said: �He praised them until I wished that I was one of them.� (Ibn Hanbal, with a sound isnad. Haythami, X, 51.) On the authority of Abdallah ibn Amr ibn al-As, who said: �I heard Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) saying: "This command [the Caliphate] shall be in Quraysh. No-one shall oppose them without being cast down on his face by Allah, for as long as they establish the religion."� (Bukhari, Manaqib, 2.) The hadith which appears to praise Tamim is hence not exceptional, and can by no stretch of the imagination be employed to indicate Tamim�s superiority over other tribes. In fact, out of this vast literature on the merits of the tribes, only one significant account praises Tamim. This runs as follows: Abu Hurayra said: �I have continued to love Banu Tamim after I heard three things concerning them from Allah�s Messenger (s.w.s.). "They will be the sternest of my Umma against the Dajjal; one of them was a captive owned by �A�isha, and he said: �Free her, for she is a descendent of Ismail;� and when their zakat came, he said: �This is the zakat of a people,� or �of my people�."� (Bukhari, Maghazi, 68.) This hadith clearly indicates that the rigour of the Tamimites will be used for, and not against, Islam in the final culminating battle against the Dajjal; and this is unquestionably a merit. The second point is less significant, since all the Arabs are descendents of Ismail; while the variant readings of the third point make it difficult to establish its significance in an unambiguous way. Even the most positive interpretation, however, allows us to conclude no more than that the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) was pleased with that tribe at the moment it paid its zakat. As we shall see, its payment of zakat proved to be short-lived. Far more numerous are the hadiths which explicitly critique the Tamimites. These hadiths are usually disregarded by pro-Najdite apologists; but traditional Islamic scholarship demands that all, not merely some, of the evidence be mustered and taken as a whole before a verdict can be reached. And a consideration of the abundant critical material on Tamim demonstrates beyond any doubt that this tribe was regarded by the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) and by the Salaf as deeply problematic. An early indication of the nature of the Tamimites is given by Allah himself in Sura al-Hujurat. In aya 4 of this sura, He says: �Those who call you from behind the chambers: most of them have no sense.� The occasion for revelation (sabab al-nuzul) here was as follows: �The "chambers" (hujurat) were spaces enclosed by walls. Each of the wives of Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) had one of them. The aya was revealed in connection with the delegation of the Banu Tamim who came to the Prophet (s.w.s.). They entered the mosque, and approached the chambers of his wives. They stood outside them and called: "Muhammad! Come out to us!" an action which expressed a good deal of harshness, crudeness and disrespect. Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) waited a while, and then came out to them. One of them, known as al-Aqra� ibn Habis, said: "Muhammad! My praise is an ornament, and my denunciation brings shame!" And the Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) replied: "Woe betide you! That is the due of Allah."� (Imam Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Juzayy, al-Tashil [Beirut, 1403], p.702. See also the other tafsir works; also Ibn Hazm, Jamharat ansab al-�Arab [Cairo, 1382], 208, in the chapter on Tamim.) In addition to this Qur�anic critique, abundant hadiths also furnish the Umma with advice about this tribe. Since the tacit acceptance of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) constitutes a hadith, we may begin with the following incident. This relates to a famous poem by Hassan ibn Thabit (r.a.). The Tamimites were late converts to Islam, joining the religion, after much resistance, only in the Year of Delegations (�am al-wufud), which was the ninth year of the Hijra. They hence miss the virtue of sabiqa, of precedence in Islam. Coming at last to the Prophet (s.w.s.), the Tamim insisted on a public debate against him, and he appointed Hassan to reply to the Tamimites� vain boasting about their tribe. Hassan�s ode, which completely defeated and humiliated them by describing the low status of their tribe, can be considered evidence for the Prophet�s (Allah bless him and give him peace) own view of Tamim, since the condemnation was given in his presence, and there is no record of his criticising it. (Diwan Hassan ibn Thabit [Beirut, 1966], p.440; for full details of the incident see Barquqi�s commentary in the same volume. See also Ibn Hisham, Sira [Guillaume translation], p.631.) A further hadith concerning Tamim runs as follows: On the authority of Imran ibn Husayn (r.a.): �A group of Tamimites came to the Prophet (s.w.s.), and he said: "O tribe of Tamim! Receive good news!" "You promise us good news, so give us something [money]!" they replied. And his face changed. Then some Yemenis came, and he said: "O people of Yemen! Accept good news, even though the tribe of Tamim have not accepted it!" And they said: "We accept." And the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) began to speak about the beginning of creation, and about the Throne.� (Bukhari, Bad� al-Khalq, 1.) The harsh waywardness of the Tamimi mentality documented in the Qur�an and Hadith casts an interesting light on the personality of Abu Jahl, the arch-pagan leader of Quraysh. Abu Jahl, with his fanatical hatred of the Prophet (s.w.s.), must have been shaped by the Tamimi ethic in his childhood. His mother, Asma� bint Mukharriba, was of the tribe of Tamim. (al-Jumahi, Tabaqat Fuhul al-Shu�ara, ed. Mahmud Shakir [Cairo, 1952], p.123.) He also married the daughter of �Umayr ibn Ma�bad al-Tamimi, by whom he had his son, predictably named Tamim. (Mus�ab ibn Abdallah, Nasab Quraysh [Cairo, 1953], p.312.) An attribute recurrently ascribed to the Tamimites in the hadith literature is that of misplaced zeal. When they finally enter Islam, they are associated with a fanatical form of piety that demands simple and rigid adherence, rather than understanding; and which frequently defies the established authorities of the religion. Imam Muslim records a narration from Abdallah ibn Shaqiq which runs: �Ibn Abbas once preached to us after the asr prayer, until the sun set and the stars appeared, and people began to say: "The prayer! The prayer!" A man of the Banu Tamim came up to him and said, constantly and insistently: "The prayer! The prayer!" And Ibn Abbas replied: "Are you teaching me the sunna, you wretch?"� (Muslim, Salat al-Musafirin, 6.) Banu Tamim and the Khawarij Perhaps the best-known of any hadith about a Tamimite, which again draws our attention to their misplaced zeal, is the hadith of Dhu�l-Khuwaysira: Abu Sa�id al-Khudri (r.a.) said: �We were once in the presence of Allah�s Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) while he was dividing the spoils of war. Dhu�l-Khuwaysira, a man of the Tamim tribe, came up to him and said: "Messenger of Allah, be fair!" He replied: "Woe betide you! Who will be fair if I am not? You are lost and disappointed if I am not fair!" And Umar (r.a.) said, "Messenger of Allah! Give me permission to deal with him, so that I can cut off his head!" But he said: "Let him be. And he has companions. One of you would despise his prayer in their company, and his fast in their company. They recite the Qur�an but it goes no further than their collarbones. They pass through religion as an arrow passes through its target."� Abu Sa�id continued: �I swear that I was present when Ali ibn Abi Talib fought against them. He ordered that that man be sought out, and he was brought to us.� (Bukhari, Manaqib, 25. For the �passing through� see Abu�l-Abbas al-Mubarrad, al-Kamil, chapter on �Akhbar al-Khawarij� published separately by Dar al-Fikr al-Hadith [Beirut, n.d.], pp.23-4: �usually when this happens none of the target�s blood remains upon it�.) This hadith is taken by the exegetes as a prophecy, and a warning, about the nature of the Kharijites. There is a certain type of believing zealot who goes into religion so hard that he comes out the other side, with little or nothing of it remaining with him. One expert who confirms this is the Hanbali scholar Ibn al-Jawzi, well-known for his hagiographies of Ma�ruf al-Karkhi and Rabi�a al-Adawiya. In his book Talbis Iblis. (Beirut, 1403, p.88) under the chapter heading �A Mention of the Devil�s Delusion upon the Kharijites� he narrates the hadith, and then writes: �This man was called Dhu�l-Khuwaysira al-Tamimi. [...] He was the first Kharijite in Islam. His fault was to be satisfied with his own view; had he paused he would have realised that there is no view superior to that of Allah�s Messenger (s.w.s.).� Ibn al-Jawzi goes on to document the development of the Kharijite movement, and the central role played by the tribe of Tamim in it. Hence (p.89) �The commander of the fight [against the Sunnis, at Harura] was Shabib ibn Rab�i al-Tamimi�; also (p.92) �Amr ibn Bakr al-Tamimi agreed to murder Umar�. All this even though their camp sounded like a beehive, so assiduously were they reciting the Qur�an (p.91). The Kharijite movement proper commenced at the Siffin arbitration, when the first dissenters left the army of the khalifa Ali (k.A.w.). One of them was Abu Bilal Mirdas, a member of the tribe of Tamim (Ibn Hazm, 223), who despite his constant worship and recitation of the Qur�an became one of the most brutal of the Kharijite zealots. He is remembered as the first who said the Tahkim - the formula �The judgment is Allah�s alone� - on the Day of Siffin, which became the slogan of the later Kharijite da�wa. In his long analysis of the Kharijite movement, Imam Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi also describes the intimate involvement of Tamimites, and of Central Arabians generally, noting that the tribes of Yemen and Hijaz contributed hardly anyone to the Kharijite forces. He gives an account of Dhu�l-Khuwaysira�s later Kharijite activities. Appearing before Imam Ali ibn Abi Talib (k.A.w.) he says: �Ibn Abi Talib! I am only fighting you for the sake of Allah and the Hereafter!� to which Imam Ali replies: �Nay, you are like those of whom Allah says, "Shall I inform you who are the ones whose works are most in loss? It is they whose efforts are astray in the life of this world, but who think that they are doing good!" [Kahf, 103].� (Imam Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi, al-Farq bayn al-firaq [Cairo, n.d.], 80; see the note to p.76 for the full identification of Dhu�l-Khuwaysira.) As Imam Abd al-Qahir gives his account of the early Kharijite rebellions, replete with appalling massacres of innocent Muslim civilians, he makes it clear that the leaders of each of the significant Kharijite movements hailed from Najd. For instance, the Azariqa, one of the most vicious and widespread Khariji movements, were led by Nafi� ibn al-Azraq, who was from the Central Arabian tribe of Banu Hanifa (Abd al-Qahir, 82). As the Imam records, �Nafi and his followers considered the territory of those who opposed them to be Dar al-Kufr, in which one could slaughter their women and children. [...] They used to say: "Our opponents are mushriks, and hence we are not obliged to return anything we hold in trust to them.� (Abd al-Qahir, 84.) After his death in battle, �the Azariqa pledged their allegiance to Ubaydallah ibn Ma�mun al-Tamimi. Al-Muhallab then fought them at Ahwaz, where Ubaidallah ibn Ma�mun himself died, along with his brother Uthman ibn Ma�mun and three hundred of the most fanatical of the Azariqa. The remainder retreated to Aydaj, where they pledged their allegiance to Qatari ibn al-Fuja�a, whom they called Amir al-Mu�minin.� (Abd al-Qahir, 85-6.) The commentator to Abd al-Qahir�s text reminds us that Ibn Fuja�a was also of Tamim (p.86). The Azariqa, who massacred countless tens of thousands of Muslims who refused to accept their views, had a rival in the Najdiyya faction of the Kharijites. These were named after Najda ibn Amir, a member of the tribe of Hanifa whose homeland is Najd; Najda himself maintained his army in Yamama, which is part of Najd. (Abd al-Qahir, 87.) As is the way with Kharijism in all ages, the Najdiyya fragmented amid heated arguments generated by their intolerance of any dissent. The causes of this schism included the Kharijite attack on Madina, which came away with many captives; and different Kharijite ijtihads over sexual relations with Muslim women who, not being Kharijites, they had enslaved. Three major factions emerged from this split, the most dangerous of which was led by Atiyya ibn al-Aswad, again of the tribe of Hanifa. Following Najda�s death, his own faction split, again into three, one of which left Najd to raid the vicinity of Basra (Abd al-Qahir, 90-1). The last major Kharijite sect was the Ibadiyya, which, in a gentler and much attenuated form, retains a presence even today in Zanzibar, southern Algeria, and Oman. The movement was founded by Abdallah ibn Ibad, another Tamimi. Its best-known doctrine is that non-Ibadis are kuffar: they are not mu�mins, but they are not mushriks either. �They forbid secret assassinations [of non-Ibadis], but allow open battles. They allow marriages [with non-Ibadis], and inheritance from them. They claim that all this is to aid them in their war for Allah and His Messenger.� (Abd al-Qahir, 103.) The best-known woman among the Kharijites was Qutam bint �Alqama, a member of the Tamimite tribe. She is remembered as the one who told her bridegroom, Ibn Muljam, that �I will only accept you as my husband at a dowry which I myself must name, which is three thousand dirhams, a male and a female slave, and the murder of Ali!� He asked, �You shall have all that, but how may I accomplish it?� and she replied, �Take him by surprise. If you escape, you will have rescued the people from evil, and will live with your wife; while if you die in the attempt, you will go on to the Garden and a delight that shall never end!� (Mubarrad, 27.) As is generally known, Ibn Muljam was executed after he stabbed imam Ali (k.A.w.) to death outside the mosque in Kufa. Muslims anxious not to repeat the tragic errors of the past will wish to reflect deeply upon this pattern of events. Tens of thousands of Muslims, fervently committed to the faith and outstanding for their practical piety, nonetheless fell prey to the Kharijite temptation. The ulema trace the origins of that temptation back to the incident of Dhu�l-Khuwaysira, who considered himself a better Muslim than the Prophet himself (s.w.s.). And he, like the overwhelming majority of the Kharijite leaders who followed in his footsteps, was a Tamimi. Of the non-Tamimi Kharijites, almost all were from Najd. The Ridda: the First Fitna There is a further issue which Muslims will wish to consider when forming their view of Najd. This is the attitude of the Najdis following the death of the Messenger (s.w.s.). The historians affirm that the great majority of the rebellions against the payment of zakat which broke out during the khilafa of Abu Bakr (r.a.) took place among Najdis. Moreoever, and even more significantly, many of the the Najdi rebellions were grounded in a strange anti-Islamic ideology. The best-known of these was led by Musaylima, who claimed to be a prophet, and who established a rival shari�a which included quasi-Muslim rituals such as forms of fasting and dietary rules. He also prescribed prayers three times a day. As leader of a rival religion, he and his Najdi enthusiasts were in a state of baghy, heretical revolt against due caliphal authority, and Abu Bakr (r.a.) sent an army against them under Khalid ibn al-Walid. In the year 12 of the Hijra Khalid defeated the Najdis at the Battle of al-Aqraba, a bloody clash that centred on a walled garden which is known to our historians as the Garden of Death, because many great Companions lost their lives there at the hands of the Najdis. (See Abdallah ibn Muslim Ibn Qutayba, Kitab al-Ma�arif [Cairo, 1960], p.206; Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri, Futuh al-buldan [repr. Beirut, n.d., 86.] An indication of the continuity of Najdi religious life is given by the non-Muslim traveller Palgrave, who as late as 1862 found that some Najdi tribesmen continued to revere Musaylima as a prophet. (W. Palgrave, Narrative of a year�s journey through Central and Eastern Arabia [London, 1865], I, 382.) The other ringleader of Najdi rebellion against the khilafa was a woman known as Sajah, whose full name was Umm Sadir bint Aws, and who belonged to the tribe of Tamim. She made claims to prophethood in the name of a rabb who was �in the clouds�, and who gave her revelations by which she succeeded in uniting sections of the Tamim who had argued among themselves over the extent to which they should reject the authority of Madina. Leading several campaigns against tribes who remained loyal to Islam, the Najdi prophetess is said to have thrown in her lot with Musaylima. Other than this, little is known of her fate. (Ibn Qutayba, Ma�arif, p.405; Baladhuri, Futuh, pp.99-100.) Recent Najdi Tendencies It is well-known that the Najdi reformer, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, was a Tamimi. The violence and takfir associated with the movement which carries his name surely bears more than a coincidental resemblance to the policies and mindset of the Tamimi Kharijites of ancient Najd. Consider, for instance, the following massacre, of the Shi�a of Karbala in April 1801, as described by a Wahhabi historian: Saud made for Karbala with his victorious army, famous pedigree horses, and all the settled people and bedouin of Najd [...] The Muslims (i.e. the Wahhabis) surrounded Karbala and took it by storm. They killed most of the people in the markets and houses. One cannot count their spoils. They stayed there for just one morning, and left after midday, taking away all the possessions. Nearly two thousand people were killed in Karbala. (Uthman ibn Bishr, Unwan al-Majd fi Tarikh Najd (Makka, 1349), 1, 121-122.) It is hard to distinguish this raid, and the brutality of its accomplishment, from the Khariji raids from Najd into the same region a thousand years earlier. Muhammad Finati, an Italian convert to Islam who served with the Caliphal army which defeated the Wahhabis, wrote a long first-hand account of the extreme barbarism of the Najdi hordes. For instance: Such among us as fell alive into the hands of these cruel fanatics, were wantonly mutilated by the cutting off of their arms and legs, and left to perish in that state, some of whom, in the course of our retreat, I myself actually saw, who had no greater favour to ask than that we would put them to death. (G. Finati, Narrative of the Life and Adventures of Giovanni Finati (London, 1830), I, 287). It is sometimes claimed that the days when �all the settled people and bedouin of Najd� would happily commit such mass murder are long gone, and that Wahhabism has become more moderate. But another, more recent example, shows otherwise. In 1924, the Wahhabi army entered the city of Ta�if, plundering it for three days. The chief qadi and the ulema were dragged from their houses and slaughtered, while several hundred other civilians lost their lives. (Ibn Hizlul, Tarikh Muluk Al Sa�ud [Riyadh, 1961], pp.151-3.) After giving the the Sunni population of the Hijaz this terrorist lesson, �Ibn Saud occupied Mecca with Britain�s tacit blessing� (Alexei Vassiliev, A History of Saudi Arabia [London, 1998], p.264). CONCLUSION A good deal of material concerning Najd and Tamim has been preserved from the time of the Salaf. If we reject the method of some Najdi apologists, a method based on the highly selective quotation of hadiths coupled with the blind imitation of opinions expressed by late-medieval commentary writers, we may reach some reasonably settled and authoritative conclusions regarding Central Arabia and its people. The Qur�an, the sound Hadith, and the experience of the Salaf overwhelmingly concur that Central Arabia is a region of fitna. The first of all fitnas in Islam emerged from that place, notably the arrogance of Dhu�l-Khuwaysira and his like, and also the apostasy and fondness for false prophets which caused such difficulty for Abu Bakr (r.a.). Subsequently, the Kharijite heresy, overwhelmingly Najdi in its roots, cast a long shadow over the early history of Islam, dividing the Muslims, distracting their armies from the task of conquering Byzantium, and injecting rancour, suspicion, and bitterness among the very earliest generations of Muslims. Only the most determined, blinkered and irresponsible Najdi sympathiser could ignore this evidence, transmitted so reliably from the pure Salaf, and persist in the delusion that Najd and the misguided, literalistic rigorism which it recurrently produces, is somehow an area favoured by Allah. And Allah knows best. May He unite the Umma through love for the early Muslims who refused bigotry, and may He preserve us from the trap of Kharijism and those who are attracted to its mindset in our time. Amin.