Answer 12: True. Hadrat Alî was Rasûlullah’s very near kin. No one denies that. The Shaikhayn also were from the Qoureish tribe, and their daughters enjoyed the honour of being Rasûlullah’s wives. Yet those closenesses are not apropos of superiority. The âyat-i-kerîma dictating a gradation of closeness in kinship was revealed for the purpose of solving matters of inheritance. It has nothing to do with matters such as caliphate, judgeship and leadership. If caliphate depended on kinship, Hadrat Abbâs would have had precedence over Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ in the caliphate election. Practices traditional in dictatorial or monarchical systems are of no documentary value as examples to be followed. It was one of the teachings of the Torah as well that caliphate should not be considered as a patrimony, but as a responsibility requiring certain qualifications. Allâhu ta’âlâ appointed Yûshâ (Joshua) ‘alaihis-salâm’, and not one of the sons of Hârûn (Aaron) ‘alaihis-salâm’, as a Prophet to succeed Mûsâ (Moses) ‘alaihis-salâm’. Islam’s instruction in this respect was that the Khalîfa be elected from among the Qoureish tribe. No mention was made, however, as to the name of the clan. The nominees would first of all have to fulfill the nine basic conditions for caliphate, in addition to being from the Qoureish tribe. The normal procedure for the assumption of caliphate was an election based on unanimity, a sine qua non which would perforce lapse in case the former Khalîfa had nominated a certain person to succeed him or one of the candidates had pulled off a coup d’etat. The Shaikhayn ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhumâ’ possessed the conditions for caliphate, and they were elected by a unanimous vote.
Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ said, “He is my brother and an intimate friend,” about Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’. And he said to ’Umar ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’: “Brother, do pray for me!” Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ was the only person blessed with the epithet “next-worldly brother,” (by the Prophet). Yet that epithet had nothing to do with caliphate. The blessed Prophet was making his Sahâba brothers to one another, when Hadrat Alî came, weeping. “You have made your Sahâba one another’s brother. But you have not made me anyone’s brother,” were the words he said to express his sorrow. His sadness touched the Messenger of Allah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’, so he said, compassionately, “You are my brother in this world and the next!” Upon the death of Es’ad bin Zerâra, the chief of Benî Najjâr, spokesman from the tribe paid a visit toRasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ and requested that he appoint a new chief for them. The blessed Prophet stated, “You are my brothers! Let me be your chief!” Brotherhood mentioned in this hadîth-i-sherîf does not indicate at all that those people were superior to the Shaikhayn.
Question 13: It is commanded in the twenty-third âyat of Shûrâ sûra that every Muslim should love Hadrat Alî.
Answer 13: The meaning of the âyat-i-kerîma is: “... No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin (to me). ...” So is the case with the followinghadîth-i-sherîfs: “Love of Alî is a symptom of îmân. Enmity against him is symptomatic of hypocrisy.” “I will fight anyone who fights you. And I will make peace with one who makes peace with you.” Yes, it is wâjib (incumbent) upon every Muslim to love and respect the Ahl-i-Bayt and to show deference to the blessed wives of the Messenger of Allah. Hadrat Abbâs ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ also is included in that honourable group. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “He who hurts my paternal uncle will have hurt me (by doing so).” Another hadîth-i-sherîf commends all the Ashâb-i-kirâm as follows: “He who loves my Sahâba does so because he loves me. He who is inimical towards my Sahâba is so because he is my enemy. He who hurts them will have hurt me (by doing so). And to hurt me means to hurt Allâhu ta’âlâ.”
Question 14: It is wâjib (incumbent) upon every Muslim to support Hadrat Alî. TheTahrîm sûra is an evidence for this fact.
Answer 14: Yes, the fourth âyat of Tahrîm sûra purports, “... and (every) righteous one among Believers – and furthermore, the angels – will back him up.” (66-4) However, the person that the âyat-i-kerîma purports will be backed up by righteous Believers is the Messenger of Allah, not Hadrat Alî. Moreover, that the expression ‘(every) righteous one among Believers’ in the âyat-i-kerîma implies Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar, is acknowledged unanimously by the Ashâb-i-kirâm. Indeed, thisâyat-i-kerîma is a clear indication of the honour which Allâhu ta’âlâ has conferred on the Shaikhayn.
Question 15: Our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated that Hadrat Alî was comparable to prophets.
Answer 15: It was not only Hadrat Alî that our Prophet ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ compared to prophets ‘alaihim-us-salawâtu wa-t-taslîmât’. Other Sahâbîs also were blessed with the same commendation. Each of the so-called commendations was intended to point out a common merit which the Sahâbî concerned shared with the prophet to whom he was compared. For instance, he compared the zuhd of Abû Zer (Ghifârî) to that of Îsâ (Jesus) ‘alaihis-salâm’; the mercy of Abû Bakr to that of Îsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’; the austerity of Hadrat ’Umar to that of Nûh (Noah) ‘alaihis-salâm’; and the pulchritudinous and clear diction of Abû Mûsa’l Ash’arî to that of Dâwûd (David) ‘alaihis-salâm’.
Question 16: Doesn’t the event of roast fowl indicate that Allâhu ta’âlâ loves Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ very much?
Answer 16: The Messenger of Allah had a roast fowl with him. He invoked, “Yâ Rabbî! Send one of Thine slaves whom Thou lovest so that we eat this fowl together!” Hadrat Alî came over. They ate it together. This is certainly a true narration. That Hadrat Alî is one of the beloved slaves of Allâhu ta’âlâ is an incontrovertible fact. But the Glad Tidings was not peculiar to him. Hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat ’Umar also were given similar Glad Tidings. The following hadîth-i-sherîfs are widely known: “Allâhu ta’âlâ will manifest Himself to Abû Bakr in private, whereas others will be altogether as they enjoy the manifestation (tajallî) of Allâhu ta’âlâ.” “The sun has not risen over someone more auspicious than ’Umar.”
Question 17: Doesn’t the hadîth-i-sherîf, “Your position with me is identical with Hârûn’s (Aaron’s) position with Mûsâ (Moses),” imply that he must be Khalîfa (immediately after the Prophet’s decease)?
Answer 17: The book Tajrîd quotes the hadîth-i-sherîf “With me you are like Hârûn with Dâwûd! Only, there is no prophet after me,” which the blessed Prophetuttered during the Holy War of Tabuk, as a proof to adduce to its argument. The expression, “... after me,” should be construed as, “... other than me.”
An identical statement takes place in the twenty-third âyat of the Jâthiya sûra of the Qur’ân al-kerîm. For, Hârûn ‘alaihis-salâm’ did not outlive Mûsâ ‘alaihis-salâm’. His death was earlier.
This hadîth-i-sherîf was uttered as the blessed Prophet appointed Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ his substitute in Medîna previous to his departure for the Holy War of Tabuk. Likewise, Hadrat Mûsâ had appointed Hârûn ‘alaihis-salâm’ his representative during his excursion to Mount Sinai (Tûr). This hadîth-i-sherîf signifies a special honour and superiority for Hadrat Alî. Yet it does not show that he was superior to the Shaikhayn.
Question 18: Didn’t the hadîth-i-sherîf uttered at (a place called) Ghadîr-i-Humappoint Hadrat Alî as Rasûlullah’s Khalîfa?
Answer 18: As for the event of Ghadîr-i-Hum; Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ had appointed Hadrat Alî governor of Yemen. Hadrat Alî utilized a jâriya who belonged to the Bayt-ul-mâl. That behaviour of his became the topic of a rumour which gradually spread, reaching the blessed ears of the Messenger of Allah. To prevent the fitna, the blessed Prophet commanded that Hadrat Alî be loved, stating, “If I am mawlâ for a person, Alî, too, be mawlâ for him,” which meant, “He who loves me ought to love Alî, too.” The word ‘mawlâ’ takes place in many âyats of the Qur’ân al-kerîm. It has been interpreted as ‘person who is beloved’. Thathadîth-i-sherîf is similar to the hadîth-i-sherîf, “He who believes in Allah should be kind to his guest!” That hadîth-i-sherîf does not only concern Hadrat Alî. Another hadîth-i-sherîf contains the following invocation about Hadrat Hasan: “Yâ Rabbî! I love him. May Thou love him, too! And please do love also those who love him!” They were at a place called Ghadîr-i-Hum, somewhere between Mekka and Medîna, when Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ held Hadrat Alî by the hand and said, “If I am mawlâ for a person, Alî, too, be mawlâ for him! Yâ Rabbî, please do love anyone who loves him, and if anyone should hate him, may he incur Thine hatred!” Thereupon Hadrat ’Umar came near Hadrat Alî and said, “How lucky for you, O Alî! You are now beloved to all Believers.” Zayd bin Erqam is reported to have related the following event, in the book Muslim: Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ delivered a khutba near a spring of water called Ghadîr-i-Hum. He stated, “I am a human after all. My life will come to an end one day. I leave the Book of Allah and my Ahl-i-Bayt for you. Hold fast to the path guided by the Qur’ân al-kerîm! Appreciate the value of my Ahl-i-Bayt!” The bookTirmuzî narrates the following event on the authority of Imrân bin Hasîn: Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ sent us out for jihâd under the command of Hadrat Alî. Hadrat Alî took one of the jâriyas, who were called slaves, for himself. Four people reported this to the Messenger of Allah. Extremely hurt, the Messenger of Allah stated, “What is it that prompts you to work against Alî? Alî is from me, and I am from him. After me, Alî is the walî of every Believer.” These hadîth-i-sherîfs command to love the Ahl-i-Bayt. Mawlâ and walî are synonymous and they mean ‘person who is loved’. Zayd bin Erqam is reported, in Tirmuzî, as having related: Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ stated, “I leave two things for you. If you adhere to them you will remain in the right path after me. One of them is greater than the other. It is the Book of Allah. The second one is my Ahl-i-Bayt. These two will never part from each other until they meet me by the Pond (the waterside, called Kawthar, in Paradise)!” The phrase, “These two will never part from each other,” means, “A person who adheres to the Qur’ân al-kerîm ought to love the Ahl-i-Bayt.” To adhere to the Ahl-i-Bayt means to love them. As it is something generating thawâb (reward, blessing in the Hereafter) to obey the Qur’ân al-kerîm, it is, likewise, something which causes thawâb to love the Ahl-i-Bayt. None of the hadîth-i-sherîfs quoted so far, however, imply that Alî was to be the (first) Khalîfa, the (first) Imâm. It is utterly wrong and abominably unfair to invoke these hadîth-i-sherîfs in maligning the Ahl-i-Sunnat and thereby sowing discord among Muslims. May Jenâb-i-Haqq bless us all with love of the Ahl-i-Bayt and of all the Ashâb-i-kirâm ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anhum ajma’în’! Âmîn!
Question 19: Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ did not live in disbelief even for a moment before he became a Believer.
Answer 19: If it were a superiority not to have been a disbeliever before embracing Islam, all the later Muslims would necessarily be superior to the Ashâb-i-kirâm. It is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Once a person has become a Believer, all his sins previous to his conversion will be forgiven.”
Question 20: Hadrat Alî rendered many services to Islam.
Answer 20: That most of the services to Islam were rendered by the Shaikhayn is as clear as the sun. For, it was the Shaikhayn who compiled the Qur’ân al-kerîm. It was the Shaikhayn who established the method of narration, divided the religious teachings into scientific branches, conquered Arabia, and made the Byzantine and Iranian lands homes of Islam. Most of the Muslims on the earth are in one of the three Madhhabs, namely Mâlikî, Hanafî, and Shâfi’î. And the basic teachings of these three Madhhabs are on matters which Hadrat ’Umar obtained by way of ijmâ’ (consensus of the Sahâba). These Madhhabs contain little information coming from Hadrat Alî. No country of disbelievers was conquered in the time of Hadrat Alî. Nor were unity and peace established among Muslims. The benefits which this Ummat (Muslims) attained owing to the Shaikhayn are much more than the benefits which they owe to Hadrat Alî. The thawâb which pioneers of a religiously beneficial area will earn increases by the multiplication of the number of the people who utilize that area by the amount of thawâb which each of them will earn. All the Muslims called Ahl as-Sunnat are the followers of the path guided by the Shaikhayn. And most of the Muslims on the earth belong to this Sunnî group. Three aberrant groups came out from Hadrat Alî’s progeny. Activities engaged in by all three groups were destructive of Islam. Had it not been for the infinite compassion of Allâhu ta’âlâ, they would have annihilated Islam. One of them was the group called Imâmiyya. According to that group, the compilers of the Qur’ân al-kerîm were not dependable people. For, people in the Imâmiyya group deny the (authenticity of the) Ashâb-i-kirâm and the well-known seven imâms (, i.e. scholars, leaders,) of (the Islamic science called) Qirâat. On the other hand, not a single report comes from the Twelve Imâms, who are the only dependable sources according to the Imâmiyya group. And, since those people do not report any Marfû’ hadîths,[77] either, they do not have a book of hadîths to depend on. Likewise, the Zaydiyya group also reject most of the religious teachings derived from hadîth-i-sherîfs. Those people are responsible for the bloody events of discord that stain the annals of history. The third group, Ismâ’îliyya, are the worst. They are Islam’s enemies in every sense of the word. All the multitudinous heresies that have been ravaging the religious beliefs and practices of Muslims were fabricated by those three groups. Their iniquities could by no means mar Hadrat Alî’s ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ honour. By the same token, Hadrat Mu’âwiya ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’ could not be blamed for the misdeeds of Yazîd or of the Umayyad governors. Those people are responsible for their own cruelties and wrongdoings. It is equally true, however, that not an iota of thawâb reaches Hadrat Alî via those people. On the other hand, the Shaikhayn receive myriads of blessings daily, owing to the blessings which the Sunnî Muslims earn (on account of the pious deeds and correct practices they have been doing), and this reproduction of blessings will keep on increasing till the end of the world.
Question 21: Hadrat Alî was perfect both physically and spiritually. Therefore he is superior to the Shaikhayn.
Answer 21: Before discussing the matter of sheer physical and spiritual superiority, we have considered it relevant to quote a passage from Sharh Mawâqif and then give an all-in-all answer. It is stated as follows in Mawâqif: “Hadrat Alî was a treasure of high merits which were elements of superiorty. He was the most knowledgeable one of the Sahâba. He grew up under the edification of the Messenger of Allah. He became the blessed Prophet’s son-in-law. He was highly intelligent. From the Messenger of Allah he learned such profound facts as others could not learn. As for Hadrat Abû Bakr; he was rather of age, [i.e. he was thirty-eight years old,] when he embraced Islam. He would see the Messenger of Allah once daily. The zuhd of Hadrat Alî is not unknown to anyone. He was very kind and generous, too. So much so that he was performing namâz one day when he dispensed his ring as alms. Thereupon an âyat-i-kerîma was revealed to laud him. At another time, it was immediately after sunset and he was about to break his fast which he had been performing as a votive offering, when a poor man came to the door. He gave all the food to the poor man. (The event took place three times running. On the first evening, it was a poor man who came to the door, asking for something to eat. The following evening, as Hadrat Alî, –and four other people; namely, Hadrat Fâtima, Hadrat Hasan, Hadrat Husayn, and Fidda, who was a jâriya, who had fasted all day long in fulfilment of a vow which they had made for the healing of Hadrat Hasan and Husayn from a fatal illness–, was about to break his fast, –and the others their fast–, when an orphan came to the door asking for something to eat. They gave all the food to the orphan. The same event took place the following evening, and the person at the door, a slave this time, was given the entire food. This event is told in detail in the ninth episode about Hadrat Alî in the book Manâqib-i-chihâr yâr-i-ghuzîn, by Sayyid Ayyûb bin Siddîq.) Thereupon another âyat-i-kerîma was revealed to commend their self-abnegation. Hadrat Alî was ahead of all others on account of the heroism and gallantry he displayed in the Holy Wars. So tremendously did he prove his mettle in the Holy War of Hendek (Trench), that the blessed Prophet praised him in his hadîth-i-sherîf, “One blow which Alî deals with his sword is more valuable than the total amount of all the acts of worship performed by all human beings and genies.” Equally well-known are the praisals lavished on him for the undaunted prowess he demonstrated in the other Holy Wars, especially at Haybar. No less was the reputation that he acquired owing to his beautiful moral habits. He had great physical strength, too. He lifted the gate of the fortress, pulling it off its hinges. “I have broken this gate not by muscular strength, but by a special strength given by Allâhu ta’âlâ,” he said. Hadrat Alî was not only akin to the Messenger of Allah by way of lineage, but also related to him by marriage. Abbâs was Abdullah’s brother only by father, whereas Abû Tâlib, (i.e. Hadrat Alî’s father,) was Abdullah’s brother by both parents. Hadrat Alî was the husband of the highest of all women, (i.e. Hadrat Fâtima). He was the father of Hasan and Husayn, the highest of the young people of Paradise.”
Before forwarding our argument against the passage, we would like to acknowledge that Hadrat Alî ‘radiy-Allâhu ’anh’ did have the merits cited, definitely. All Muslims ought to hold this belief and love him very much. However, assuming the office of caliphate requires other superiorities as well. Various occupations and arts require varying superiorities in which to excel others. Lineage and outward appearance are not among the criteria to satisfy in a championship of scholars. The superiority to be fulfilled for being a prophet’s khalîfa should be similar to the superiority with which prophets are specially endowed for the assumption of their prophetic duties. It is for this very reason that scholars, Awliyâ and other people who endeavour to promulgate Islam by way of Amr-i-ma’rûf and Nahy-i-munkar and Jihâd are more valuable than and superior to sportsmen, tradesmen and expert accountants, who are apparently more powerful. Likewise, being elected as Khalîfa requires a substantiated superiority to others in meeting the scientific, ethical and practical criteria upheld by the Messenger of Allah. In fact, of all these three sets of criteria, the practical ones outbalance the other two. Among the Ummat (Muslims), there may be some lucky peeople who obtain new pieces of information by way of inference [and research] or inspiration. Yet those pieces of information are not so valuable as the knowledge possessed by the Prophet. The prophetic knowledge is that which is practical in spreading knowledge and Islam, in deriving by way of inference the unclear principles concealed in them, in explicating those principles and culling the tenable ones from among a number of uncertain principles, and in providing a consensus (when necessary). Uppermost of all these practicalities is mastery in securing order, peace and comfort among the Ummat. A minute study of the times of the four Khalîfas will by no means reveal Hadrat Alî’s superiority to the Shaikhayn in the perpetuation of the prophetic teachings and deeds. Whereas Hadrat Alî’s knowledge made him superior in the speed of response, the Shaikhayn’s knowledge outweighed his in that they were patient and answered questions only after a fastidious study of the matters or, (when necessary,) after providing a consensus (of the Sahâba). Hadrat Alî had very much zuhd, and the Shaikhayn also had very much zuhd. The munificence of the Shaikhayn was several times better than the munificence of Hadrat Alî. Furthermore, his dispensing his ring as alms as he was performing namâz and his giving the food he was going to eat after breaking fast were not among the authentic narrations. Even if they were authentic, then again it is a bare fact that he was not superior to them, in the face of the multitude of the âyat-i-kerîmas commending them, especially on account of the acts of charity performed by Hadrat Abû Bakr. Whereas Hadrat Alî was superior in the strength of his fists, the Shaikhayn were superior in the fortitude they displayed in coping with the renegades and subduing the Iranian and Byzantine empires. In addition, the Shaikhayn were multiples of times superior in the beautiful moral finess they showed in the appeasement of the Ummat (Muslims) and in the settling of quarrels. Versus Hadrat Alî’s very close kinship, the Shaikhayn are closer to the Messenger of Allah in their graves, and so will they be at the place of Mahsher (the place where all people will gather for judgement), and also as they go to Paradise. Whereas Hadrat Alî had the honour of being Hadrat Fâtima’s spouse, Hadrat Abû Bakr was blessed with the honour of fatherhood of Hadrat Âisha, Rasûlullah’s blessed wife and also his companion in Paradise. The Qur’ân al-kerîm contains ten âyats lauding and praising Hadrat Âisha. One-fourth of the knowledge of Fiqh was learned from her. Likewise, Hadrat ’Umar’s daughter, Hadrat Hafsa, was Rasûlullah’s wife in the world, and so will she be in Paradise as well, and Jebrâîl ‘alaihis-salâm’ has praised her as a blessed woman who “has dedicated herself to performing namâz and fasting continually.” Although some of the descendants of Hadrat Alî were the best people of their times, there were also others who caused grave harm to Islam. The aberrant groups called Ismâ’îliyya, Zaydiyya and Imâmiyya, for instance, owed their existences to his descendants. History books give detailed accounts of the bloody ventures which some of his descendants –whose number is hardly below one hundred– undertook and misled an untold number of Muslims with the help of the hordes of supporters that crowded around them. Such demolishers of Islam were not seen among the descendants of the Shaikhayn. People who descended fromthem, especially Abdullah bin ’Umar, Hadrat Âisha, Sâlim, Qâsim, Ubaydullah bin ’Umar ’Umarî, and many others, were sources of guidance who led people to happiness. Men of Tasawwuf such as Shihâbuddîn Suhrawardî and Fakhruddîn Suhrawardî, who came after the Twelve Imâms, and book-owners like Fakhruddîn Râzî Waliyyuddîn were all people who attained guidance owing to the fayz they received from the descendants of the Shaikhayn. If a person’s being of Hashimite descent or having an abundant progeny were something conducive to his superiority, Hadrat Alî would –mayAllâhu ta’âlâ protect us against such a disastrous belief– necessarily be superior to the Messenger of Allah. If it should be argued that “Those superiorities apply among those who are below prophethood; they become null and void on the prophetic level,” then it should be admitted that they lose their validity also on levels where prophetic attributes are perpetuated although in similarity. True, they are effective with people below those levels. As a matter of fact, Hadrat Alî was superior to all the Sahâbîs who lived during his caliphate. This is the belief held by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. What we have written so far are answers to Nasîruddîn Tûsî’s book Tajrîd.
Question 22: Why should superiority be an indispensable criterion for assuming office as Khalîfa? We might as well put it that way: Superior as Hadrat Alî was, the unlearned people would have refused to pay homage to him because he had killed the fathers and friends of the Qoureishî people, because he had never shown remission in his invitation to Islam, and because he was hasty in his chastisements. Since Rasûlullah ‘sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam’ was a best psychiatrist, he may have preferred to appoint someone else for the office of caliphate.
Answer 22: Allâhu ta’âlâ sent prophets ‘alaihim-us-salawât-u-wa-t-taslîmât’ for the rectification of peoples and for the establishment of peace and welfare among them. It is therefore a prophet’s duty to choose a person who will represent his prophetic attributes best. If he chooses someone else, he will have misused his authority and committed an injustice. It is senseless to say that the Qoureishî people would have refused to pay homage to someone who had killed their fathers and friends. If it were sound reasoning, the Messenger of Allah would have preceded Hadrat Alî in the list of people rejected for the same reason. For, it was by his order that all the Sahâba, not only Hadrat Alî, had killed the Qoureishî people in the Holy Wars. The fact, however, was that those Qoureishîs who had embraced Islam loved the Messenger of Allah more than their own lives.
Question 23: Holding the Shaikhayn superior on the persuasion that deeds such as helping the Messenger of Allah and promulgating Islam and making jihâd in the Iranian and Byzantine lands as well as in Arabia and compiling the Qur’ân al-kerîm and conquering countries and supporting Muslims are prophetic attributes, exposes a predisposition wide open to various other arguments. For one thing, the most valuable Sunnî books such as Sharh Mawâqif and Sharh ’Aqâid hold that superiority depends on the abundance of thawâb (deeds that will be rewarded in the Hereafter). Isn’t the superiority defined above contradictory to the unanimous teaching of these books? Furthermore, isn’t the propounded definiton suggestive of the assumption that Hadrat Mu’âwiya and certain other commanders must be superior to Hadrat Alî on account of their conquests of lands of disbelievers? Our third antithesis would be that the so-called elements of superiority are kinds of attributes that are acquired afterwards. They are complementary to one’s congenital superiorities. In fact, it is stated in a hadîth-i-sherîf: “Allâhu ta’âlâ promulgates this religion (Islam) also through someone who is a fâjir[disbeliever].” Another fact that should not escape our attention is that there were Prophets with only one believer each; which indicates that conquering various lands and promulgating the religion are not among the prophetic attributes. With the essential fact that prophets are all identical (in their prophetic duties), similarity to ourProphet cannot be presented as an exception to “prove the rule.” That means to say that similarity to our Prophet must be similarity in some other attributes! Furthermore, if the conquest of lands were indicative of superiority, Hadrat ’Umar would necessarily have been superior to Hadrat Abû Bakr. The services which Hadrat Alî rendered in the Holy Wars made during the time of our Prophet were more than those rendered by any of the others. The conquests and services that would be done after our Prophet, on the other hand, were not known during the first caliphate election. Then, why should it be taken for granted that Hadrat Abû Bakr was the most superior and that the first election was based on a consensus?
Answer 23: These speculations show that what we have said is not understood well. We have not said that superiority consists in promulgating the religion, making jihâd, capturing countries and compiling the Qur’ân al-kerîm only. These are a few of the components making up the superiority. These components can be divided into three groups. In the first group are the components of similarity in the prophetic attributes, which causes superiority in helping the Messenger of Allah and perpetuating the blessed Messenger’s duties after him. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat divided the duty among themselves. One group undertook the science dealing with hadîth-i-sherîfs, while another group spread the teachings of (the science called) Kalâm. When a statement is said to belong to the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat, it is the statement of a consensus reached unanimously by