leadership without right, just like al-Hākim and his fellow rulers from the Banū Ubayd,” would he not be lying and fabricating this, given the soundness of Ali’s and al-Husayn’s faith, religion, and virtue, and the hypocrisy and heresy of those men?
Likewise, if anyone were to liken Ali and al-Husayn to some of the Tālibids—or others—who rose up in the Hijaz, the East, or the West, seeking authority without right and wronging people in their property and their lives (1), would he not be an unjust liar?
Therefore, anyone who likens Abu Bakr and Umar to Umar ibn Saʿd is all the more guilty of falsehood and injustice. At most, Umar ibn Saʿd and others like him would admit that he pursued worldly gain through an act of disobedience which he acknowledges (2) to be such. This is a sin that [has occurred] frequently among Muslims (3).
As for the Shia, many of them admit that they only (4) sought power in order to corrupt the religion of Islam and oppose the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—as is evident from the statements of the Bātinis and others like them who joined the Shia. They admit that, in reality, they do not believe in Islam and merely make an outward show of Shiism because of the Shia’s weak intellect and ignorance, so that they may use them to attain their own ends.
The earliest of these—indeed, the best of them—was al-Mukhtār ibn Abī Ubayd, the Liar (5). For he
(1) N and M read: “some of the rulers of the Hijaz who seek kingship without right and wrong people in their persons and property … etc.”
(2) N reads: “admitting”; M reads: “so they expressed,” which is a textual corruption.
(3) N and M read: “This is the sin of many Muslims.”
(4) N and M read: “when,” which is an error.
(5) Al-Mukhtār ibn Abī Ubayd ibn Masūd al-Thaqafī, Abū Ishāq, called upon the Shia to pledge allegiance to Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyya. He claimed that Muhammad had appointed him as his deputy, and many people followed him. He then killed most of those responsible for al-Husayn’s death, fought the Umayyad army, and killed Ubayd Allah ibn Ziyād. Kufa, al-Jazira, and other territories subsequently came under his rule. He later claimed prophethood and alleged that revelation descended upon him. Musab ibn al-Zubayr fought him until he killed him in 67 AH.
The Kaysāniyya sects among the Rāfida are attributed to al-Mukhtār. Al-Shahrastānī and others specifically call his followers the Mukhtāriyya. It is said that he was nicknamed Kaysān; alternatively, he may have derived his doctrine from a client of Ali—may Allah be pleased with him—named Kaysān. For accounts of al-Mukhtār and his life, see: al-Tabarī, Tārīkh al-Tabarī, al-Maārif ed., 5:569–582, events of 66–67 AH, and 6:5–116; al-Dīnawarī, al-Akhbār al-Tiwāl, Ministry of Culture ed., 1960, pp. [0–9]88–308; Abū al-Fidā, Tārīkh Abī al-Fidā, al-Husayniyya ed., 1:194–195; al-Masūdī, Murūj al-Dhahab, 3:105–107; al-Dhahabī, Siyar Alām al-Nubalā, 3:353–356; Lisān al-Mīzān, vol. 6; al-Ziriklī, al-Alām, 8:70–71; al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, pp. 26–34; al-Milal wa-l-Nihal, 1:132–134; al-Nawbakhtī, Firaq al-Shia, al-Matbaa al-Haydariyya, Najaf, 1379/1959, pp. [0–9]4–45, 48. See also Dr. Ali al-Kharbūtlī, al-Mukhtār al-Thaqafī, Silsilat al-Arab, Cairo, 1963.