Few view the thread of Islamic history outside the prism of the governmentally “approved” and “authorized” catechisms of hadith (Sahih). The Imams who compiled these “authorized by the government hadiths (Sahih) had no intention of setting up schools of thought or mathabs that became vehicles that promoted the policies, or approved the legitimacy or even authority of the rulers or the philosophies they espoused. Many of the non-Shia Muslim religious leaders were appointed and supported by corrupt Khalifs. Many of the scholars however, were not corrupt but were mild mannered and learned to look the other way. They promoted Islam the way the rulers wanted or, like Imam Malik and others we shall point out, attempted to avoid the pressure of the ruling regimes by shunning public life until they were, like the Shia Imams, hunted, hounded and killed. The same state of affairs were handed down into the modern era and the best examples are today’s Imams in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. They do not object to corruption and the takfiri conditions around them and serve as an adjunct to the forces of Islamic corruption and secular political control. Malik ibn Anas ibn Malik ibn `Amr, al-Imam, Abu `Abd Allah al-Humyari al-Asbahi al-Madani 711 – 795 CE / 93 -179 AH. Malik was second of four major mujtahid imams. The school that his students and subsequent scholars founded in his name and based on his writings filled North Africa, al-Andalus, much of Egypt, and some of al-Sham, Yemen, Sudan, Iraq, and Khurasan. Yet he spent most of his time in seclusion avoiding public life and the demands of the government that he issue fatwas that he disbelieved in and harmed Islam or the Prophet’s family. So the spread of his work far and wide exposes the work of the government and GOVERNMENTAL APPOINTED scholars using his name and work as a basis of political collusion with the ruling regimes. Imam Malik is the author of al-Muwatta’ (“The Approved”), formed of the narrations of the Prophet from the people of the Hijaz together with the sayings of the Companions, the Followers, and those after them. Abu Mus’ab said: “Malik did not pray in congregation [in the Prophet’s mosque] for twenty-five years. He was asked: ‘What is preventing you?’ He said: ‘Lest I see something reprehensible and be obligated to change it.” Another narration from Abu Mus’ab states: “After Malik left the [Prophet’s] mosque he used to pray in his house with a congregation that followed him, and he prayed the Jum’a prayer alone in his house.” Ibn Sa’d narrates from Muhammad ibn ‘Umar: “Malik used to come to the Mosque and pray the prayers and the Jum’a, as well as the funeral prayers. He used to visit the sick and sit in the Mosque where his companions came and saw him. Then he quit sitting there, instead he would pray and leave, and he quit attending the funeral prayers. Then he quit everything, neither attending the prayers nor the Jum’a in the mosque. Nor would he visit anyone who was sick or other than that. The people bore with it, for they were extremely fond of him and respected him too much. This lasted until he died. If asked about it, he said: ‘Not everyone can mention his excuse.” Abu Mus’ab recounts the following story: I went in to see Malik ibn Anas. He said to me: “Look under my place of prayer or prayer-mat and see what is there.” I looked and found a certain writing. He said: “Read it.” It contained the account of a dream which one of his brothers had seen and which concerned him. Malik recited it [from memory]: “I saw the Prophet in my sleep. He was in his mosque and the people were gathered around him, and he said: ‘I have hidden for you under my pulpit (minbar) something good – or: knowledge – and I have ordered Malik to distribute it to the people.’” Then Malik wept, so I got up and left him. Malik finally stood in opposition when the Khalif Abu Ja’far al-Mansur had forbidden Malik to narrate the hadith: “The divorce of the coerced does not take effect.” Then a government spy came to Malik and asked him about the issue, whereupon Malik narrated the hadith in front of everyone. He was seized and lashed until his shoulder was dislocated and he passed out. Ibrahim ibn Hammad said he saw Malik being carried up and walking away, carrying one of his hands with the other. Then they shaved his face and he was mounted on a camel and paraded. He was ordered to deprecate himself aloud, whereupon he said: “Whoever knows me, knows me; whoever does not know me, my name is Malik ibn Anas, and I say: The divorce of the coerced is null and void!” When news of this reached Ja’far ibn Sulayman (d. 175) the governor of Madina and cousin of al-Mansur, he said: “Bring him down, let him go.” Malik’s ethics, together with the states of awe and emotion which were observed on him by his entourage, were no doubt partly inherited from great shaykhs of his such as Ja’far al-Sadiq, Ibn Hurmuz, and Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri. He visited his shaykh Ibn Hurmuz (d. 148) every day from morning to night for a period of about eight years and recounts: “I would come to Ibn Hurmuz, whereupon he would order the servant to close the door and let down the curtain, then he would start speaking of the beginning of this Umma, and tears would stream down his beard.” The Maliki shaykh Ibn Qunfudh al-Qusantini (d. 810) wrote: The Khalif Harun al-Rashid said to Malik after hearing his answers to certain questions he put to him: “You are, by Allah! the wisest of people and the most knowledgeable of people.” Malik replied: “No, by Allah! O Leader of the Believers.” He said: “Yes! But you keep it hidden. By Allah! If I live, I shall put your sayings in writing like the mushafs are put down in writing, and I shall disseminate them to the ends of the world.” But Malik refused. When one of the Khalifs manifested his intention to replace the Prophet’s wooden pulpit with a pulpit of silver and jewels Malik said: “I do not consider good the hindrance of the people from access to the Prophet’s relics.” History notes that Malik b. Anas, the great jurist of Madina, had issued a legal opinion contrary to the wishes of Ja`far b. Sulayman, the governor of Madina. The latter required him to present himself in his court where he was first humiliated and then whipped severely with seventy lashes. This caused him to be bed-ridden for some time. Later on, Mansur sent for Malik. In the beginning he apologized for Maliks having been treated so harshly by Ja`far b. Sulayman. Then he asked him to write a book on law and traditions. But be careful not to include difficult traditions narrated by ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Umar, trivial topics related by ‘Abd Allah b. ‘Abbas, and the rare hadith reported by Ibn Mas’ud. Include only those things on which the Khalifs and the companions had agreed. Write this book so that I can send it to all cities and require people to strictly follow only this book, and none other. Malik complained that the scholars from Iraq held variant opinions on matters related to law and hence would not accept his opinions. Mansur asked him to write the book anyway and assured him that he would impose it even on the people of Iraq. If they do not submit, I will behead them and will punish them severely. Hence, be quick in writing this book. Next year my son Mahdi will come to you to get it. That book has come down to us as the “Muwatta”. Imam Malik died at the age of 84 in Medina in 795 CE and is buried in the famous Jannat ul-Baqi cemetery across from the Masjid al Nabawi. Malik’s last words were related by one Isma’il Ibn Abi Uways who said, “Malik became sick, so I asked some of our people about what he said at the time of his death. They said, `He recited the shahadah then he recited: Their affair is for Allah, before and after. Imam Bukhari Muhammad ibn Isma’il al-Bukhari al-Ju’fi was born after the Jumu’ah prayer on Friday, 13 Shawwal 194 AH (19 July 810) in the city of Bukhara in Khorasan (in present-day Uzbekistan). His father, Isma’il ibn Ibrahim, a scholar of hadith, was a student and associate of Imam Malik. Some Iraqi scholars related hadith narrations from him. He began studying hadith in the year 205 (A.H.). He memorized the works of [‘Abdullah] ibn al-Mubaarak while still a child. He was raised by his mother because his father died when he was an infant. He traveled with his mother and brother in the year 210 after having heard the narrations of his region. He began authoring books and narrating hadith while still an adolescent. He said, “When I turned eighteen years old, I began writing about the Companions and the Followers and their statements. This was during the time of ‘Ubaid Allah ibn Musa (one of his teachers). At age of sixteen, he, together with his brother and widowed mother made the pilgrimage to Makkah. From there he made a series of travels in order to increase his knowledge of hadith. He went through all the important centres of Islamic learning of his time, talked to scholars and exchanged information on hadith. It is said that he heard from over 1,000 men, and learned over 600,000 traditions. After sixteen years absence he returned to Bukhara, and there drew up his al-Jami as-Sahih, a collection of 7,275 traditions, arranged in chapters so as to afford bases for a complete system of jurisprudence without the use of speculative law. In the year 864/250, he settled in Nishapur. It was in Neyshābūr that he met Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj. He would be considered his student, and eventually collector and organiser of hadith collection Sahih Muslim which is considered second only to that of al-Bukhari. Khalid b. Ahmad, the governor of Bukhara, asked Muhammad b. Isma’il Bukhari, to bring his written traditions to him and read them. Bukhari refused to do so and sent him a message that if he did not wish him to collect traditions he should say so, so that he could have a valid excuse for not doing so on the Day of Judgement. It was for that reason that he was deported from his homeland. He took refuge in a small village known as Khartang where he lived in banishment until his death. The narrator relates that he heard Bukhari pray to Allah in his midnight prayer: O Allah, if the earth has turned narrow for me, then take my life away. It was the same month in which he died. Imam Abu Hanifa Hafizi-Hadith Hadhrat Imam Abu Hanifah was a prestigious Mujtahid, Muhaddith, authoritative person, truthfully spoken, abstinent, wise, and pious.Al Imam al A’zam (the Great Imam), as he is referred to by those who adore him. He preceded Imam Malik by ten years, Imam Shafii by a generation and Imam Ahmed by a hundred years. Imam Abu Hanifah studied under Imam Ja’afar as Sadiq. In turn, the other great Imams had the benefit of the legacy of Imam Abu Hanifah when they took on the monumental task of codifying Fiqh. Imām Abū Ḥanīfah was born in the city of Kufa in Iraq, during the reign of the powerful Umayyad Khalif Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan. Imām Abū Ḥanifa was born 67 years after the death of Muhammad, but during the time of the Sahaba of Muhammad, some of whom lived on until Abū Ḥanīfah’s youth. Anas bin Malik, Muhammad’s personal attendant, died in 93 AH and another companion, Abul Tufail Amir bin Wathilah, died in 100 AH, when Abū Ḥanīfah was 20 years old. He was a rich man, a successful merchant, a wonderful human being who lived among common folk with the zest and enthusiasm of a believer and contributed to the life of the community that he was a part of. Abu Hanifah was born as Nu’man bin Thabit bin Marzuban. His grandfather Marzuban was an Afghan from Kabul. Unlike most Arabic names, the name Abu Hanifah is derived from the name of one of his daughters, The people of Baghdad relate that Hanifah, the daughter of the Imam, was well known for her piety and showed great intelligence and wisdom at an early age. She had her own halqa (a study circle) where she instructed students in matters of religion. As the fame of Hanifah spread, people started to refer to the Imam as Abu Hanifah (the father of Hanifah). Nu’man bin Thabit, later known by his universal name Imam Abu Hanifah, was born in the year 699 CE in the city of Kufa. was of Afghan parentage through his grandfather Marzuban. Kufa was at the time a garrison city in a period of rapid expansion of the Omayyad Empire. It was also the provincial capital of Iraq and a commercial center, a meeting place for Persians, Arabs, Afghans and Indians. Turkish tribesmen wandered in from Central Asia as did the Chinese from far away Sinkiang. It is related that when he was eight years old and was on his way to his grandfather’s silk store, he was stopped by a Shaykh and was asked which madrasa he was headed to. The Shaykh saw the light on the face of the young Abu Hanifah and sensed his great potential. When Abu Hanifah answered that he was headed to the silk store of his grandfather and not to a madrasa, the Shaykh guided him instead to a classroom. The young Abu Hanifah made rapid progress and soon outperformed all the other students in his class, memorizing the Quran, learning hadith and Sunnah and soaking in the knowledge that the best of the Shaykhs had to offer. The learning of the young Shaykh Abu Hanifah soon attracted the attention of students and scholars. Young and old alike attended his halqa (a circle of students) and learned from him. Traveling to the Hijaz, Abu Hanifah performed his Hajj and spent two years in Madina attending the halqa of Imam Ja’afar as Sadiq, learning from him the inner meaning of the Shari’ah as transmitted from the Prophet through ahl-e-bait. Imam Abu Hanifah said, “If it were not for the two years I spent with Ja’afar as Sadiq, I would be left wandering”, we accept the premise that Imam Abu Hanifah did indeed attend the halqa of Imam Ja’afar as Sadiq and learned ilm ul ishara (the knowledge of the unseen) from him. Hanifah was very human and had a keen sense of humor. Once a man asked him about taking a swim in the river. “Should I face the qibla when I bathe in the river”, asked the man. “No”, replied the Imam, “You should face the bank of the river and watch your clothes”. His success and his greatness made the political establishment of the times jealous of him. In 766 CE, Khalif al Mansur asked Imam Abu Hanifah to be the chief Kadi (judge) of Baghdad. The Khalif had hoped that by offering him a high post he could bring the Imam under his control. But the great ulema and sages and awliyah have through the ages refused the favors of kings and noblemen to maintain their independence. Abu Hanifah declined. The Khalif, furious that his invitation was spurned, had the Imam flogged and put in jail. Even in the prison, the Imam continued to teach and train his disciples. And it was in prison that this great mujtahid breathed his last in the year 767 CE after being poisoned. Al-Nasāī (214 – 303 AH / ca. 829 – 915 AD/CE) Aḥmad ibn Shu`ayb ibn Alī ibn Sīnān Abū `Abd ar-Raḥmān al-Nasāī, was a noted collector Of hadith (sayings of Muhammad), and wrote one of the six canonical hadith collections recognized by Sunni Muslims, Sunan al-Sughra, or Al-Mujtaba, which he selected from his As-Sunan al-Kubra. As well as 15 other books, 6 dealing with the science of hadith. Abu Abdurrahman Ahmed ibn Shuaib ibn Ali ibn Sinan ibn Bahr ibn Dinar Al-Khurusani was born in the year 215 A.H as the Imam clearly states himself (although some say 255 A.H or 214 A.H) in the city of Nasa, situated in Western Asia known at that time as Khurusan which was a centre for Islamic Knowledge where thousands of Ulamaa were situated and Hadith and Fiqh was at its peak. Thus he primarily attended the gatherings and circles of knowledge in his town and attained knowledge, especially Hadith from the Ulamaa. Thereafter his inspiration increased of traveling around the world to seek knowledge from other various scholars of different countries and cities. When he was 20 years old, he started traveling and made his first journey to Qutaibah. He covered the whole Arabian Peninsula seeking knowledge from the Ulama and Muhadditheen of Iraq, Kufa, Hijaz, Syria and Egypt . Finally he decided to settle in Egypt. Hafiz Ibn Hajr Rahimahullahi Alaih says that it is impossible to name and gather all his teachers but some are: - (1) Ishaq ibn Rahweh (2) Imam Abu Daud Al-Sijistani (author of Sunan Abu Dawood) and (3) Qutaibah ibn Saeed. After the Imam had decided to stay in Egypt he started to lecture, mostly narrating Ahadith to the extent that he became known by the title Hafizul Hadith. Many people would attend his gatherings and many scholars became his students, including: Imam Abul Qasim Tabrani Imam Abubakr Ahmed ibn Muhammad also known as Allamah ibn Sunni Sheikh Ali, the son of the Muhaddith, Imam Tahawi. The Imam would put on good clothing according to the Sunnah of Muhammad and would eat poultry everyday with nabeeth acting on the Sunnah so that he could worship Allah with ease. In fact it is narrated that the man would fast every other day which is classified in the Hadith as Saum-u-Daoodi (the fast of Da’uwd). He would worship Allah continuously throughout the nights and teach Hadith throughout the day without forgetting that to fulfill the rights of his four wives and treat his slaves like his children. The Imam would also perform Hajj nearly every year and would also take part in Jihad. He was a straight forward truthful man and nothing or none could stop him from saying the truth. At the same time he was an extremely handsome man and the beauty of his face remained to his death. Imam al-Nasai was a follower of the Shafi Fiqh according to Allamah as-Subki, Shah Waliullah, Shah Abdulaziz and many other scholars. The leader of the Ulamaa Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri is to the opinion that he was a Hanbali and this has also been stated by ibn Taymiyyah but the truth is that he was an independent mujtahid who often agreed and disagreed with others. The Imam also left behind many beautiful and beneficial works. Many of which unfortunately are not published but we can without any doubt conclude from what we have understood that his knowledge and excellence is no less than that of Imam Bukhari and Allamah ibn Hazm. These are a few of his works: Sunan Al-Kubra. Sunan Al-Sugra/Al-Mujtana/Al-Mujtaba. Amul Yawmi Wallaylah. Kitaby Dufai wal Matrookeen Khasais Ali. Al-Jurhu wa Taadeel. Sunan Al-Nisai. His book known as Sunan Al-Nisai which is taught around the globe in every Islamic institute and which possesses the distinction of being one of the Sihah Sitah (the six governmentally approved books generally taught in hadith). In reality when the Imam had finished compiling Sunan Al-Kubra he presented it to the governor of Ramalah so the governor asked him “is it all sahih (are all the narrators 100% authentic), (meaning governmentally approved)?” He replied in the negative, thus the governor suggested and requested that he compile another book and compile in it Sahih or government approved Hadith. So then he did this and named his book Sunan Al-Sugra (the small Sunan) and Al-Mujtaba and Al-Mujtana (both mean carefully chosen) and this is the Sunan which we know as Sunan Al-Nasai. In this book he follows the footsteps of Imam Muslim and Imam Bukhari who also adhere to the government guidelines. Overall most of the Ahadith are Sahih. Thus it is 3rd in number in the Sihah Sittah after Bukhari and Muslim according to some Ulamaa because of its Sahih narrations. When Nasai wrote his book Khasais, in which he included traditions in praise of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib, he was asked to appear in Damascus and was ordered to write a similar book in praise of Mu’awiya. He declined to write such a book because he could not find any materials praising him except what the Prophet had said about him: May Allah never fill his stomach! Because of this statement Nasai was beaten up so badly that he died from his injuries. Violations of Free Expression under the “Rightly Guided” Khalifs Ibn ‘Asakir has related a tradition in which, according to ‘Abd al-Rahman b. ‘Awf, ‘Umar b. Khattab sent for some of the prominent companions of the Prophet, including Abd Allah b. Hudhayfa, Abu Darda, Abu Dharr Ghiffari, and ‘Uqba b. ‘Amir, and reproached them saying: What are these traditions that you are relating and spreading among the people? The companions said: Apparently, you want to stop us from transmitting the traditions. ‘Umar said: You have no right to step outside Madina, and as long as I am alive do not distance yourselves from me. I know better which hadith should be accepted and which should be rejected. The companions had no choice but to stay in Madina as long as ‘Umar lived. Ibn Sa’d and Ibn ‘Asakir have related that Mahmud b. ‘Ubayd heard ‘Uthman b. ‘Affan telling people from the mimbar: No one has the right to relate a tradition that was not narrated during Abu Bakr and ‘Umars time. During his reign Mu’awiya had sent official directions that his security was removed from anyone who reported a tradition in praise of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib and his descendants. At another time he sent a written command that whereas the people should narrate the merits of the companions and the Khalifs, they should be forced to relate for all the other companions merit a similar to that which was attributed to ‘Ali. (Hence we see fabricated hadith like Abu Bakr and ‘Umar are the Cheifs of the Old Men of Paradise to parallel the Prophet’s hadith calling Hasan and Husayn the Chiefs of the Youths of Paradise.)as The Arabic term aṣ-Ṣaḥāba the companions; from the verb صَحِبَ, accompany, keep company with, associate with) refers to the companions, disciples, scribes and family of the prophet Muhammad AS. Later scholars accepted their testimony of the words and deeds of Muhammad, the occasions on which the Quran was revealed and various important matters of Islamic history and practice. The testimony of the companions, as it was passed down through chains of trusted narrators (isnads), was the basis of the developing Islamic tradition. From the traditions (hadith) of the life of Muhammad and his companions are drawn the Muslim way of life (sunnah), the code of conduct of the Prophet Muhammad; i.e. everything the Prophet AS said, did, ordered to be done, and allowed to be done. From those narratives is partly derived the fiqh and jurisprudence of Islam. The two largest Islamic denominations, the Sunni and Shia, take different approaches in weighing the value of the companions testimony, have different hadith collections and, as a result, often have different constructed views about the Sahabah, fiqh, and jurisprudence due to the establishment of state sponsored schools and government authorized judges that were established under the names and auspices of the four Imams who had little to do with the fiqh and fatwas that emanated from them in their names. Shias have different views on each Sahabi, depending on what he or she accomplished. They do not accept that the testimony of nearly all Sahaba is an authenticated part of the chain of narrators in a hadith and that not all the Sahaba were righteous just because they saw or were with Muhammad as. Shias further argue that the righteousness of Sahaba can be assessed by their loyalty towards Muhammads family after his death and they accept hadith from the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt, believing them to be cleansed from sin through their interpretation of the Quran Surah 33 Verse 33 and the hadith of the Cloak. Shia do not have a ranking system dependent on when the Sahabi embraced Islam but according to what they did during their life. If a Sahaba made Muhammad angry or questioned his decision several times then he is viewed as unreliable. Shias consider that any hadith where Muhammad is claimed to have absolved all Sahaba from sin is a false report by those who opposed the Ahl al-Bayt. The Shia believe that after the death of Muhammad, the majority of the sahabah turned aside from true Islam and deviated from Muhammads family, instead electing the Khalif by themselves at a place called Bani Saqeefa, they did this by a minority vote and elected Abu Bakr as the first Khalif. Although some of the sahabah repented later, only a few of the early Muslims held fast to Ali, whom Shia Muslims regard as the rightful successor to Muhammad. Shia scholars therefore deprecate hadith believed to have been transmitted through unjust companions. The Shia believe that Muhammad announced his succession during his lifetime at Dawat Zul Asheera then many times during his prophethood and finally at Ghadeer e Khum. The Abbasids and most other Muslims formed a united front against the Umayyads that finally overthrew their rule over the empire. Although these movements were heavily based on restoring the usurped rights of the ahl al-bayt and avenging the unjust murders of the Alids, the Abbasids and their supporters manipulated the insurrection to their own advantage. With treachery and treason, they distorted the actual direction of the movement and seized power from the supporters of the Alids, and rather than allowing the Ahlul Bayt to set up the true Imamate, they established themselves as the ahl al-bayt of the Prophet, belying the tradition of the Cloak, and as the new Khalifs of Islam. Many of the ulama today recognized as Sunni, were part of that freedom seeking struggle that the ‘Abbasids usurped as Ahlul Bayt interlopers to transform themselves as the leaders of the new Sunni sects. In this revolution, which was founded upon Shii ideals of justice and equity, the people had succeeded in proving their ability to overthrow the tyrannical rule of the Umayyads. They were pleased that they had eliminated the source of Umayyad corruption and had helped to return the right to rule to its rightful leaders among the ahl al-bayt. After all, they had at least succeeded in getting rid of Umayyad oppression. The success had led them to aspire to a better life and a more equitable society. In fact, they had congratulated each other in those terms. However, within a short period they were awakened to the cruelty of the new dynasty, the Abbasids, and realized that the new rulers were not very different from those they had replaced. There was no change in their living conditions, no justice, no equity, and no peace. Their lives and property were not secure from the worldly rulers and administrators of the new state. The promised reforms and promulgation of the divine ordinances were far from being realized. Gradually, as people became aware of the failure of the revolution they had helped to launch, they became conscious of their error in judgement regarding the Abbasids and their deception in the name of the promised Imamate. The Alid leaders also found the Abbasid behavior towards them and towards Islam and the Muslims not very different from that of the Umayyads. In fact, the Abbasids proved themselves to be even more manipulative and brutal towards the descendants of Ali b. Abi Talib. They were left with no alternative than to launch their resistance anew and fight the Abbasids also. The best persons among them to lead such resistance were undoubtedly the descendants of Ali and Fatima (peace be upon them). The reason was that there were a number of their descendants who were known for their piety, wisdom, knowledge and courage. In fact, they were regarded as more qualified candidates for the Khalafa. Moreover, they were the true descendants of the Prophet and their direct lineage to him generated a sense of loyalty and love for them. In addition, because their rights had been usurped and they had suffered wrongs at the hands of the Umayyads, the masses had a natural inclination and sympathy for the ahl al-bayt. Consequently, as the Abbasids persisted in committing atrocities against the ahl al-bayt the people were, more than ever before, drawn towards them and rallied to their cause in opposing the rulers and in rebelling against them. In addition, they made use of the notion of the Mahdi that had from the time of the Prophet taken deep roots in the minds and hearts of Muslims and introduced their revolutionary leader as the promised Mahdi. This required the Abbasids to confront some of the most popular, highly respected, and very learned rivals to their power. The Abbasid Khalifs knew the Alawid leaders well, being fully aware of their personal qualities and honorable family lineage and the prophecies that were foretold by the Prophet about the future coming of the Mahdi, the restorer of Islamic purity. They knew that in accordance with the traditions reported from the Prophet the awaited Mahdi would be one of the descendants of Fatima (peace be upon her). He would be the one to rise against tyranny and oppression and establish the rule of justice on earth. Moreover, they knew that his victory was guaranteed. The promise of justice through the appearance of the Mahdi had an enormous spiritual impact upon the people and the Khalifal authority was fully informed about its potentially explosive repercussions in the empire. It is probably correct to say that the most formidable challenge to Abbasid authority was from these Alawid leaders, who had caused them to loosen their grip on the regions under their control and face the consequences of their corrupt rule. The strategy that was adopted by the Abbasids in the light of this growing opposition to them was to divide the followers of these Alawid leaders and prevent them from rallying around them. The leaders themselves were kept under constant surveillance and, the famous ones among them were either imprisoned or eliminated. According to Yaqubi, the historian, the Abbasid Khalif Musa Hadi tried his utmost to arrest the prominent descendants of Ali b. Abi Talib. He had even terrorized them and had sent instructions all over his realm demanding that they be arrested and sent to him. Similarly, Abu Faraj Isfahani writes: When Mansur became the Khalif all he was concerned about was the arrest of Muhammad b. Abd Allah b. Hasan [b. Ali b. Abi Talib] and finding out about his plans [regarding his claim to being the Mahdi]. One of the issues that was extremely sensitive and worth investigating was the claim to invisible existence or occultation of some of the Alawid leaders. Any one among them who had the personal ability and qualities to become the leader immediately attracted the people who then rallied around him with dedication. This attraction took an extreme and intense form if that person happened to possess one of the signs of the expected Mahdi. On the other hand, as soon as a person became the rallying point for the people, the Khalifal authority became fearful of the opposition and undertook to keep a close watch over its underground activities and even to curtail its growing popularity among the masses by using terror as a means of repressing revolutionary fervor. Under these circumstances, the leader had to live in concealment to protect himself. A number of these Alawid leaders lived a life of concealment for a number of years. Among them are the following examples cited by Abu Faraj Isfahani: During the time of Mansur, the Abbasid Khalif, Muhammad b. `Abd Allah b. Hasan and his brother Ibrahim lived an hidden life. Mansur had tried several times to arrest them. A number of the Hashimite leaders were imprisoned and they were grilled to reveal the whereabouts of their messianic leader Muhammad b. `Abd Allah. At the end of the day the prisoners were tortured in various ways and killed. ‘Isa b. Zayd lived in retreat and concealment during Mansurs Khalifate. Mansur made every effort to arrest him, but he failed. Following him, his son Mahdi also tried, but without any success. During the Khalifate of Mu`tasim and Wathiq, Muhammad b. Qasim `Alawi lived a secluded life in concealment and was regarded as being in occultation by the establishment. He was, however, arrested during Mutawakkils Khalifate and died while in prison. During the Khalifate of Harun Rashid, Yahya b. `Abd Allah b. Hasan lived in concealment. But he was finally discovered by the Khalifs spies. At first he was given amnesty, but later he was arrested and incarcerated. He died in Rashids prison of hunger and other forms of torture. During the Khalifate of Mamun, `Abd Allah b. Musa lived in concealment and because of him Mamun lived in constant fear and anxiety. Musa Hadi appointed one of the descendants of `Umar b. Khattab by the name of ‘Abd al-`Aziz as the governor of Madina. `Abd al-`Aziz used to treat the ‘Alids very harshly. He kept them under constant surveillance, watching their movements very closely. He used to force them to appear in his audience every day so that they would not disappear. He actually exacted promises from them to that effect and made each one of them answerable for the other. Thus, for instance, Husayn b. `Ali and Yahya b. `Abd Allah were made responsible for Hasan b. Muhammad b. `Abd Allah b. Hasan. On one of the Fridays when the Alawids were all gathered in his presence he did not allow them to return until it was time for Friday prayer service. At that time he permitted them to perform their ablutions and prepare for the worship. After the prayer was over he ordered all of them arrested. During the late afternoon prayer he asked them to attend the court and later dismissed them. It was then that Abd al-Aziz noticed that Hasan b. Muhammad b. Abd Allah was not present. So he called Husayn b. Ali and Yahya b. Abd Allah, who were answerable for him, and informed them that for the past three days Hasan b. Muhammad had not appeared in his audience. As such, he had either revolted or disappeared. Since they were answerable for him they had to find Hasan and bring him to `Abd al-`Aziz, otherwise they would be imprisoned. To this Yahya replied: He must have been occupied and, therefore, did not show up. It is not possible for us also to bring him back. Justice is a good thing. Just as you keep a check on us making sure who is present and who is not, why do not you ask the descendants of `Umar b. Khattab also to appear in the audience? See how many are present, and if their absentees are not more than ours then we have no objection to your decision. Do as you please and take any decision regarding us. `Abd al-`Aziz was not satisfied with their response. He swore that if they did not find Hasan and bring him to him he would demolish their homes, set their goods on fire and whip Husayn b. Ali. Episodes like this reveal that the topic of invisible existence or occultation of the Alawid leaders was one of the regular issues during the Abbasid era. As soon as one of them disappeared from public life he became the center of attention from two directions: on the one hand, the masses, who knew that occultation was one of the signs of the Mahdi, were attracted towards him; on the other hand, the Khalifal authority had developed an extreme sense of anxiety because of the explosive ramifications of such a disappearance for the security of its power. After all, it was one of the signs of the Mahdi, and when the people were told of the disappearance of these Alids they speculated of their being the promised messianic leader who would overthrow the tyrannical government of the Abbasids. Hence, the authorities were worried about the ensuing chaos and political turmoil unfolding in front of their eyes which the Khalifal power would have difficulty in repressing. Now that you have familiarized yourself with the critical social and political conditions that existed during the Abbasid period and during which the hadith books were compiled and composed, it is important to remember that the authors of these works and the transmitters of the hadith did not possess the freedom to record all the hadith-reports dealing with the promised Mahdi, and more particularly, traditions dealing with the Will of the Prophet AS, or the occultation and the rise of the awaited Mahdi. They did not permit the transmitters of the traditions about the messianic role of the Mahdi and his occultation to freely record and publicize the traditions that would have actually been to their own detriment. This therefore is the cause of the repression of the ulama in general, namely those who were not directly aligned with the Ahlul Bayt. The Implications of the Situation In view of the political turmoil and social unrest that existed under the Abbasids and the activist message of the traditions that deal with Mahdiism, especially the disappearance of and eventual revolution under the Mahdi which had taken on a political dimension, the masses were attracted to the promises of a better future that were made in these messianic traditions. Moreover in the unfavorable conditions that existed for the authors and compilers of such traditions, it was almost unthinkable that they would publish traditions dealing with the signs of the appearance of the Mahdi, his invisible existence and his ultimate emergence with the mission of destroying the wicked forces of injustice. More importantly, it is highly improbable that the ruling dynasties would have permitted the publication and dissemination of the information that was available to these scholars. The publication of such ideas was deemed a danger that directly threatened the stability of their unjust and illegitimate power. Consequently, neither Malik b. Anas nor Abu Hanifa could have recorded any traditions dealing with Mahdiism and the occultation in their books. It is worth recalling that it was during this period that Muhammad b. `Abd Allah b. Hasan and his brother Ibrahim were living an invisible and fearful life. A large number of people believed that Muhammad was the promised Mahdi who would revolt against the unjust rule of the Abbasids and initiate reforms to institute justice. Due to the fact that Mansur was afraid of Muhammads disappearance and eventual revolt, he had imprisoned a number of innocent Alawids to arrest him. After all, he was the same Khalif who had killed Abu Hanifa with poison, and whose governor had brutally whipped Malik b. Anas. Again, it is relevant to bear in mind that it was Mansur who had ordered Malik to write a book in which he should reject any hadith from `Abd Allah b. `Umar, `Abd Allah b. `Abbas and Ibn Mas`ud. When Malik objected by pointing out that the people of Iraq (Shi’as) had their own traditions and opinions, Mansur promised that he would coerce them into accepting Maliks version. Who could have objected to the Khalif that he should keep clear of the peoples religious matters? Why should the traditions reported by such prominent early figures like Ibn Mas’ud and others be rejected? There is no reason that can justifiably be cited to explain such an irrational behavior on the part of those who were in power. To be sure, these individuals whose traditions were prohibited from being cited were relating traditions that were viewed by these wicked rulers as a threat to their power. This includes the so-called “Rightly Guided Khalafa. Hence, they banned their publication and dissemination. In the case of Malik, it is said that he had heard some hundred thousand traditions of which he published only five hundred in his book on traditions: Muwatta. In other words, it was impossible for the traditionists like Ahmad b. Hanbal, Bukhari and Nasai to record traditions that were more favorable to the Alawids without suffering torture and deportation at the hands of the Abbasids. (Despite being an exceptional jurist, Imam Ahmad detested that his opinions be written and compiled, fearing that it may swerve his students away from studying the sources of Law, the Quran and the Sunnah. To legitimize the misuse of Imam Ahmad’s name, Ibn al-Jawzi blasphemously speaks as a prophet and comments, Allah knew the sincerity in his heart and raised around him faithful students who would record his opinions, such that an independent school of jurisprudence and theology was formed and attributed to Imam Ahmad.) Yazid received a Fatwa (approval) from State financed Scholars in Damascus to martyr Imam Husayn (RA) and 72 members of the Prophet’s (PBUH) family (Ahlul Bayt). Abu Dawud, the famous compiler of Sunan, observed that sessions with Ahmad were sessions devoted to the Hereafter, for he would never mention anything of this world. Imam Ahmad is remembered as a legendary figure in the Islamic history for his uncompromising stance and for withstanding immense pressure during the trial of “the creation of the Quran”. The Khalif at the time, Ma’mun, subjected the scholars to severe persecution, at the behest of the Muâ’tazilite theologians who attributed themselves to Imam Abu Hanifa in jurisprudence. The Mutazilites were a heretical Muslim sect, who sanctified their intelligence above the revelation and espoused the belief that, even though, the Quran is the speech of Allah, He created that speech as a distinct entity and called it “the Quran”. This was in opposition to the literalist’s belief that Allah spoke every word of the Quran, and indeed: Allah spoke to Moses directly”, as Allah states in the Quran. To consolidate his control over fiqh and jurisprudence, in the year 218 AH/833 CE, Mamun ordered all the scholars and jurists of Iraq and other places to attend an audience. He then went on to question them about their beliefs and asked them specifically regarding their belief about the Quran, whether it was the created or eternal Word of Allah. He condemned those who maintained that it was not created and instructed his governors in all provinces to reject their testimony. With the exception of a few, the decision forced a majority of the scholars to concede to the Khalifs viewpoint. The `Abbasid Khalif Mu`tasim required Ah mad b. Hanbal to appear in the court and tested him about his belief in the Quran. When Ahmad refused to submit to the Khalifs belief about the created Quran, he ordered him to be whipped. The Mu‘tazilites were discredited throughout the Umayyad rule and never given the position of prominence and influence, until the Khalif al-Mamun came to power, during the ‘Abbasids, who took them into confidence and bestowed them with official positions within the state as judges. Bishr al-Marrisi and Ahmad b. Abi Duâ’ad were the two important figures behind the Mu’tazilite inquisition, which systematically placed many jurists and traditionists on trial until they were forced to acknowledge that the Quran is created, and their acknowledgement publicised in all major cities. Nearly all the scholars of Baghdad from the jurists and the traditionists were tested, and all of them acknowledged the doctrine of the created Quran, with the exception of the two; Ahmad b. Hanbal and Muhammad b. Nuh. This greatly pained and angered Imam Ahmad, such that he boycotted some of the great traditionists for their acknowledgement, and often refused to narrate from them. Amongst those boycotted were a close companion and a colleague of Imam Ahmad, Yahya b. Maâ’in, about whom, it is said that Imam Ahmad refused to speak to him until he died and composed the following lines of poetry censuring his acknowledgement of heresy: Ya ibn al-madini al-ladhi uridat lahu Dunya fa Jada bi dinihi li yanalaha Madha daaka li intihali maqalatin Kunta tazumu kafiran man qalaha O Ibn al-Madini, to whom the world was offered, So he strove to attain it at the expense of his religion What made you embrace a dogma (about which) You would impute disbelief on the one who adopts it! Finally, Ahmad b. Hanbal and Muhammad b. Nuh were also put to the test on the order of al-Ma’mun, but they refused to acknowledge the creation of the Quran. Consequently, they were despatched in irons to be dealt with by al-Ma’mun himself. On the way, Imam Ahmad supplicated to Allah to prevent him from meeting al-Ma’mun. His prayer was answered in the sudden death of al-Ma’mun due to which they were both sent back. Muhammad b. Nuh passed away on their return journey, and there was none to prepare his funeral, pray over, and bury him, except Imam Ahmad. He remained imprisoned in Baghdad until al-Mu’tasim assumed power. Al-Mu’tasim, unlike al-Ma’mun, was a destitute to knowledge. Nevertheless, he continued the Mu’tazilite inquisition as explicitly requested by al-Ma’mun in his will. His rule was perhaps the most brutal towards Sunni scholars in general, and Imam Ahmad in particular who intransigently continued to resist all attempts by the authorities to force him to acknowledge the creation of the Quran. The frustrated Khalif finally ordered Ahmad to be flogged in public, which resulted in Ahmad falling unconscious. Imam Ahmad was released shortly afterwards, when al-Mu’tasim feared that the commotion caused in Baghdad due to mistreatment of Ahmad may reach an uncontrollable pitch. After al-Mu’tasim’s death, al-Wathiq took over the office of Khilafa, and ordered his loyal Mu’tazili judge in Egypt, Ibn Abi al-Layth to press hard with the inquisition. This caused many to flee from Egypt, while the prisons became full of jurists and traditionists who resisted the government demands. In Baghdad, however, the general public had become enraged over the policies of the government, which made it difficult for al-Wathiq to pursue the inquisition with the same vigour. He therefore, instead of re-imprisoning Imam Ahmad, resolved on banishing him from Baghdad, saying: ‘Do not live with me on this earth!’, and henceforth, Ahmad b. Hanbal went into hiding as were the prominent Shia. Towards the end of al-Wathiq’s reign, a close student of al-Shafi’i, Ahmad b. Nasr al-Khaza’i was caught by the officials and charged for organising an uprising in Baghdad. When Ahmad al-Khaza’i was brought to al-Wathiq in chains, the latter, instead of asking him about his role in the uprising, questioned him about his belief in the creation of the Quran, to which Ahmad al-Khaza’i gave the standard Sunni reply. The enraged Khalif, upon hearing his response, personally decapitated him. His head remained in Baghdad, while his body remained on a crucifix in Samurra for six years, as a grisly warning to potential rebels. After al-Wathiq’s death, his brother al-Mutawakkil took charge of the office. Al-Mutawakkil, unlike his predecessors had the utmost respect and admiration for the Sunni school, and through him, was ended the inquisition. Promptly after assuming the position as Khalif, he sent orders throughout the Khilafa to put an immediate end to all discussions regarding the Quran, released all the prisoners of faith, dismissed the Mu’tazili judges, and more significantly deported the chief instigator of the inquisition, Ahmad b. Abi Du’ad along with his family. He further ordered that the Mu’tazili judges responsible for the inquisition be cursed from by the pulpits, by name. Al-Mutawakkil, on the other hand, showed his utmost reverence to the hero of the inquisition, Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal, and wished to take care of all his affairs. Ahmad, however, turned down the offers due to his general dislike of being close to the rulers. Al-Mutwakkil, knowing that Imam Ahmad would refuse his offerings, instead presented some gifts to his son, Salih b. Ahmad. When it came to his knowledge, Imam Ahmad showed strong disapproval and refused to consume anything from his son’s wealth. After Imam Ahmad turned 77, he was struck with severe illness and fever, and became very weak, yet never complaining about his infirmity and pain until he died. In spite of his debilitation, he would urge his son, Salih b. Ahmad, to help him stand up for prayer. When he was unable to stand, he would pray sitting, or sometimes lying on his side. After hearing of his illness, the masses flocked to his door. The ruling family also showed the desire to pay him a visit, and to this end sought his permission. However, due to his desire to remain independent of any influence from the authority, unlike today’s scholars who pontificate from the false mathab created in his name, Ahmad denied them access. On Friday, the 12 of Rabi al-Awwal 241 AH, the legendary Imam breathed his last. The news of his death quickly spread far and wide in the city and the people flooded the streets to attend Ahmad’s funeral. One of the rulers, upon hearing the news, sent burial shrouds along with perfumes to be used for Ahmad’s funeral. However, respecting Ahmad’s wishes, his sons refused the offering and instead used a burial shroud prepared by his female servant. Moreover, his sons took care not to use water from their homes to wash Imam Ahmad as he had refused to utilise any of their resources, for accepting the offerings of the ruler. He who sacrifice so much to maintain his integrity and faith would shed tears if he knew that the unauthorized school and scholars that bear his name are the source of terrorism, reaction, and takfirist allies of Zionist monarchist lackeys. Alas Ikhwan, we are still saddled with despots, tyrants, corrupt aristocrats, thieves and sadistic monarchists. They have continued to maintain corrupt scholars and murdering the righteous ones. We have experienced little relief from them since the events of Saqifa. However, the events of recent history and the emergence of Ad-Dajjal presents a clearer picture because of the hadiths we’ve inherited regarding the Dajjal and the Mahdi. We see that the mathab division are but the artifices of the despots to divide and subjugate us. It is now clear that we must worship and obey Allah and not mathabs. Their alliance with Dajjal as prophesied by the Prophet as exposes them. Their actions and deeds exposes them. And those who follow them are also exposed by the KFR on their foreheads. Unity is a duty and the command of Allah. You wont find it in those fiqh books, it is a matter of obedience to Allah and a love for Islam and the believers and the rest of peaceful humanity. Allahummaghfir liy warhamniy wahdiniy wa aafiniy warzuqniy wajburniy warfa’niy Subhana Rabbiyul Aziym
Posted on: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 15:48:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015