Minhaj as-Sunnah - Ibn Taimiya - (6/362)

Minhaj as-SunnahIbn Taimiya

So consider this man’s words impartially: was the cause of discord (1) ever found outside the leading figures, or did it extend beyond them?”

The response is as follows:

This statement is among the things that reveal al-Shahrastānī’s bias toward the Shi'a in this book, as explained previously. Otherwise, he mentioned Abū Bakr, Umar, and Uthmān, yet did not say of them that the truth was with them rather than with those who opposed them. When he came to Alī, however, he said (2): “In sum, the truth was with Alī, and Alī was with the truth” (3).

A narrator without an ulterior motive must either relate events faithfully or give everyone his due. As for someone’s claim that the truth was with Alī and Alī was with the truth, singling him out for this to the exclusion of Abū Bakr, Umar, and Uthmān, no Muslim other than the Shi'a says this.

This statement is further shown to be false by his words: “Disagreement arose during Alī’s time, after they had agreed upon him and concluded the pledge of allegiance to him.” It is well known that many Muslims had not pledged allegiance to him. Indeed, even many inhabitants of Medina and Mecca who had seen him had not pledged allegiance to him, let alone those who were far away, such as the people of Syria, Egypt, the Maghrib, Iraq, and Khurāsān.

How can such a claim be made regarding the pledge of allegiance to Alī, but not regarding the pledge of allegiance to Uthmān, upon which (4) all the Muslims were united and over which not even two people disagreed?

(1) N reads: “the jurist’s cause”; M reads: “out of love for discord.” (2) That is, al-Shahrastānī in *al-Milal wa-l-Nihal*, 1/33. (3) Al-Shahrastānī’s exact wording is: “Alī—may Allah be pleased with him—was with the truth, and the truth was with him.” (4) N uses the masculine form of “which.”

فَانْظُرْ بِعَيْنِ الْإِنْصَافِ إِلَى كَلَامِ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ، هَلْ خَرَجَ مُوجِبُ الْفِتْنَةِ (١) عَنِ الْمَشَايِخِ أَوْ تَعَدَّاهُمْ؟ ". وَالْجَوَابُ: أَنْ يُقَالَ هَذَا الْكَلَامُ مِمَّا يُبَيِّنُ تَحَامُلُ الشَّهْرَسْتَانِيِّ فِي هَذَا الْكِتَابِ مَعَ الشِّيعَةِ كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ، وَإِلَّا فَقَدْ ذَكَرَ أَبَا بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمَانَ، وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ مِنْ أَحْوَالِهِمْ أَنَّ الْحَقَّ مَعَهُمْ دُونَ مَنْ خَالَفَهُمْ. وَلَمَّا ذَكَرَ عَلِيًّا قَالَ (٢) : " وَبِالْجُمْلَةِ كَانَ الْحَقُّ مَعَ عَلِيٍّ وَعَلِيٌّ مَعَ الْحَقِّ " (٣) وَالنَّاقِلُ الَّذِي لَا غَرَضَ لَهُ: إِمَّا أَنْ يَحْكِيَ الْأُمُورَ بِالْأَمَانَةِ، وَإِمَّا أَنْ يُعْطِيَ كُلَّ ذِي حَقِّ حَقَّهُ. فَأَمَّا دَعْوَى الْمُدَّعِي أَنَّ الْحَقَّ كَانَ مَعَ عَلِيٍّ وَعَلِيٌّ مَعَ الْحَقِّ، وَتَخْصِيصُهُ بِهَذَا دُونَ أَبِي بَكْرٍ وَعُمَرَ وَعُثْمَانَ، فَهَذَا لَا يَقُولُهُ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ غَيْرَ الشِّيعَةِ. وَمِمَّا يُبَيِّنُ فَسَادَ هَذَا الْكَلَامِ قَوْلُهُ: " إِنَّ الِاخْتِلَافَ وَقَعَ فِي زَمَنِ عَلِيٍّ بَعْدَ الِاتِّفَاقِ عَلَيْهِ وَعَقْدِ الْبَيْعَةِ لَهُ ". وَمِنَ الْمَعْلُومِ أَنَّ كَثِيرًا مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ لَمْ يَكُونُوا بَايَعُوهُ، حَتَّى كَثِيرٌ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَمَكَّةَ الَّذِينَ رَأَوْهُ لَمْ يَكُونُوا بَايَعُوهُ، دَعِ الَّذِينَ كَانُوا بَعِيدِينَ، كَأَهْلِ الشَّامِ وَمِصْرَ وَالْمَغْرِبِ وَالْعِرَاقِ وَخُرَاسَانَ. وَكَيْفَ يُقَالُ مِثْلُ هَذَا فِي بَيْعَةِ عَلِيٍّ وَلَا يُقَالُ فِي بَيْعَةِ عُثْمَانَ الَّتِي (٤) اجْتَمَعَ عَلَيْهَا الْمُسْلِمُونَ كُلُّهُمْ وَلَمْ يَتَنَازَعْ فِيهَا اثْنَانِ؟ .

(١) ن: مُوجِبُ الْفَقِيهِ، م: مِنْ حُبِّ الْفِتْنَةِ. (٢) أَيِ الشَّهْرَسْتَانِيُّ فِي الْمِلَلِ وَالنِّحَلِ ١/٣٣ (٣) نَصُّ كَلَامِ الشَّهْرَسْتَانِيِّ كَانَ عَلِيٌّ - رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ - مَعَ الْحَقِّ وَالْحَقُّ مَعَهُ. (٤) ن: الَّذِي.