Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:67

(O Messenger) to both weightier beings (mankind and jinn) in their entirety. It is a call of honor, for the Message is the greatest bounty of Allah the Exalted and His greatest nobility. This title also gives notice of what necessitates carrying out what he (peace and blessings be upon him) was commanded, specifically the proclamation of what was revealed to him.

(Proclaim)—that is, convey to the creation—(what has been revealed to you)—that is, all that has been revealed, whatever it may be—(from your Lord)—that is, the Owner of your affair and the One who brings you to your perfection that befits you. In this is an implicit guarantee of His protection and safeguarding for him, peace and blessings be upon him; meaning: do not fear anyone regarding this, and do not fear that any harm will ever befall you.

(And if you do not do it)—that is, what you were commanded of conveying everything—(then you have not conveyed His message)—that is, you have not performed any part of His message, since some of it is not more worthy of being performed than other parts. Thus, if you do not perform some of it, it is as if you have neglected to perform all of it, just as one who does not believe in some of it is like one who does not believe in any of it, because each part leads to what the other leads to, and because they are, in that regard, in the ruling of a single thing. A single thing cannot be "conveyed" and "not conveyed," or "believed in" and "not believed in." Furthermore, concealing some of it wastes what has been performed, like abandoning some of the pillars of prayer, for the purpose of the call is invalidated by it.

The statement negating that some parts are more worthy of performance than others was contested by asserting that priority is established by obligation—certainly or conjecturally, clearly or implicitly, fundamentally or derivatively. It was answered in al-Kashf that it negates priority with regard to the principle of obligation. Also, this pertains to the conveyer, while the discourse is about the "conveyance" itself, which does not vary in its obligation because it is a single thing in view of its essence. Then, concealing some of it indicates that he did not regard himself as commanded to convey, but rather [regarded] the interest contained in the conveyed matter; so it is as if he did not comply with this command at all, and thus he did not convey. And if he taught people [something else], it would not benefit him, for he is a mere informant at that point, not a conveyer.

The second explanation was debated on the grounds that the Lawgiver considers prayer a single matter, unlike conveyance. This is a misplaced objection, because the Exalted One obligated him—peace and blessings be upon him—to convey everything; so He has made it like prayer, without a doubt.

From what we have mentioned in the interpretation of the conditional, it is known that there is no unity between the condition and the consequence. Whoever claims such—based on the idea that the outcome is "if you do not convey the message, you have not conveyed the message"—makes it like the saying: "I am Abu al-Najm and my poetry is poetry," where the predicate is the same as the subject without additional wording. The "my poetry is poetry" is famous for its eloquence and renowned for its rhetoric, but he informed by omitting those attributes (which provide the benefit) because they are perceived as necessary consequences of his poetry in the minds of the listeners due to his fame for them; he is above needing to mention them because they are known and widespread.

So it is—as Ibn al-Munayyir said—desired in the verse, because the non-conveyance of the message is a matter known to people and established in their understanding as something great and heinous, which condemns the one who commits it. Do you not see that the failure of a scholar to disseminate knowledge is a terrible thing? How then is the concealment of the message by the Messenger? Thus, it was sufficient to omit the additions by which the condition and consequence differ, due to their attachment to the consequence in the minds, and [the fact] that everyone who hears "non-conveyance of the message" understands the threat and warning behind it. This style is enhanced in the Book of Allah the Exalted by mentioning the condition generally, as He—the Glorious—said: "And if you do not do [it]..." and did not say: "And if you do not convey the message, then you have not conveyed the message," so that they may differ in wording while being unified in meaning. This is more elegant and possesses greater luster than repeating the same words in the condition and consequence. The claim of Abu al-Najm falls short of this peak by mentioning the subject with the word of the predicate, and it is fitting that his eloquence should diminish before the eloquence of the Miracle (the Quran), so there is no fault upon him in that.

It is said: The meaning is, "If you do not do [it], then you [will suffer] what the concealment of the entire revelation necessitates," thus placing the cause in the place of the effect. This is supported by what Ishaq Rahwayh brought forth in his Musnad from the hadith of Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him), and what Abu al-Shaykh and Ibn Hibban brought forth in their Tafsir from the Mursal of al-Hasan, that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Allah the Exalted sent me with the Message, and I felt straitened by it. Then Allah the Exalted revealed: 'If you do not convey My messages, I will punish you,' and He guaranteed me protection (Ismah), so I became strengthened."

It is also said that the meaning is: If you abandon the conveyance of what has been revealed to you, it is judged that you have not conveyed at all. It is said—though I wish it were not said—that what is meant by "what was revealed" is the Quran, and what is in the response is the rest of the miracles. Others have said [different things].

The verse is used as evidence that he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not conceal anything of the revelation. It is attributed to the Shia that they claim he—peace and blessings be upon him—concealed some of it out of taqiyyah (dissimulation).

Some Sufis say the meaning is to convey what relates to the interests of the servants regarding the laws, and that the intent of its revelation was to inform them of it. As for what he was specifically given of the Unseen which did not involve the interests of his nation, he had [the right], or rather he was obligated, to conceal it. al-Sulami narrated from Ja'far (may Allah be pleased with him) regarding the saying of the Exalted: "And He revealed to His servant what He revealed," saying: He revealed without an intermediary, secretly to his heart, and no one knew of it except Him, until the Hereafter when He gives him the intercession for his nation. al-Wasiti said: He cast into the servant what he cast, and did not manifest what was revealed because He specifically gave it to him—peace and blessings be upon him—and what he was specifically given—peace and blessings be upon him—was concealed, and what Allah the Exalted sent him with to the creation was manifest.

al-Tibi said: To this points the meaning of what we have narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari from Sa'id al-Maqburi from Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: "I have memorized two vessels from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): as for one of them, I disseminated it; as for the other, if I had disseminated it, this bul'um (throat) would have been cut." He meant his neck; the root of its meaning is the passage of food, and al-Bukhari interpreted it as such. They call this the science of Divine secrets and the science of Reality (al-Haqiqah).

To this, the chief of the gnostics, Ali Zayn al-Abidin, alluded when he said: "Verily, I conceal the jewels of my knowledge, lest the ignorant see the Truth and be seduced. Abu al-Hasan preceded me in this toward al-Husayn, and he advised al-Hasan before him. How many a jewel of knowledge, if I were to disclose it, would be said to me: 'You are one of those who worship idols,' and Muslim men would deem my blood lawful, seeing as a virtue what they commit as the most ugly." From this is the science of the Unity of Existence (Wahdat al-Wujud). They have stated that it is a stage beyond the stage of the intellect, and they said: it is something the spirit learns without the intermediary of the intellect. From here, they speak of "hidden knowledge," meaning it is hidden with respect to the rationalists and the thinkers who are immersed in the mud of obstacles and attachments, not those who are detached and ascending to the enclosures of Holiness and the gardens of Light.

Sheikh Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha'rani (may Allah sanctify his soul) mentioned in his book al-Durar al-Manthura regarding the explanation of the cream of the famous sciences what translates to: "As for the cream of the science of Sufism upon which the people wrote their treatises, it is the result of acting according to the Book and the Sunnah. Whoever acts according to what he knows speaks as they spoke, and all that they said becomes some of what he has. For every time the servant ascends in the door of etiquette (Adab) with Allah the Exalted, his speech becomes subtle to the understandings, until one of them said to his sheikh: 'The speech of my brother so-and-so is subtle to my understanding,' and he replied: 'Because you have two shirts and he has one, so he is in a higher rank than you.' This is what the jurists and their likes among the people of the veil called the science of Sufism 'the science of the hidden' (al-Batin). It is not hidden, for the hidden is only the knowledge of Allah the Exalted. As for all that the creation knows, despite their different classes, it is from the science of the manifest (al-Zahir), because it was manifested to the creation. Know that." End quote.

Some have understood that the intent is to convey the laws and the interests related to them, to the exclusion of what includes the science of secrets, from His saying: "What has been revealed to you," as opposed to what He acquainted you with. It was mentioned that the science of secrets was not revealed by revelation, but by way of inspiration and disclosure. It is also said: this is understood from the word "the Message," for the message is what is sent to someone else.

Some Sufis (may Allah sanctify their secrets) have spoken at length on this station, but the truth in my view is that the Divine secrets and other legal rulings that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) possessed are fully encompassed by the revealed Quran. For the Exalted One said: "And We have sent down to you the Book as a clarification for everything," and the Exalted said: "We have not neglected anything in the Book," and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said in what al-Tirmidhi and others narrated: "There will be tribulations." It was said: "What is the way out of them?" He said: "The Book of Allah, in it is the news of those before you, the report of those after you, and the ruling of what is between you." Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Ibn Mas'ud: "Every piece of knowledge was sent down in this Quran, and everything was clarified for us in it, but our knowledge falls short of what has been clarified for us in the Quran."

al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Everything that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ruled with, it is what he understood from the Quran." This is supported by what al-Tabarani narrated in al-Awsat from the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: 'I do not make lawful anything except what Allah made lawful in His Book, and I do not make unlawful anything except what Allah made unlawful in His Book.'"

al-Mursi said: "The Quran gathered the sciences of the first and the last, such that no one encompassed it in truth except the One who spoke it, then the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), except what He reserved for Himself, the Exalted. Then the masters of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and their leaders inherited most of that from him, such as the four Caliphs, and such as Ibn Mas'ud and Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), until he said: 'If a camel's rein were lost by me, I would find it in the Book of Allah.' Then the Followers (al-Tabi'un) inherited it from him with excellence. Then ambitions fell short, resolve weakened, and the people of knowledge diminished and grew weak in carrying what the Companions and the Followers carried of its sciences and all its arts, so they categorized its sciences, and every faction arose for one of its arts."

Some said: There is nothing that cannot be extracted from the Quran for whomsoever Allah the Exalted gives understanding, to the point that some deduced the age of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as sixty-three years from His saying—the Exalted—in Surat al-Munafiqun: "And Allah will never delay a soul when its time has come," for it is the beginning of the sixty-third surah, and He followed it with al-Taghabun to manifest the taghabun (loss/mutual disillusion) in his loss by the very person of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). This is something in which two rams would hardly clash [i.e., it is very clear].

If it is proven that all of this is in the Quran, then conveying the Quran is conveying it all. The maximum that can be said is that the specific instruction on the details of that—secret by secret, and ruling by ruling—was not established by explicit expression to everyone. How many a secret and a ruling have been signaled by an indication, while the expression did not clarify them?

Whoever claims that there are secrets outside the Book of Allah the Exalted that the Sufis received from their Lord in any way whatsoever has fabricated a great falsehood and has come with the clear deviation of the son of al-Sabhal. The saying of some of them: "You took your knowledge from the dead, and we took ours from the Living who does not die," does not indicate that claim, for it is possible that this taking was from the Quran by way of a sacred understanding that Allah the Exalted granted to that taker. This is supported by what is authentic from Abu Juhayfah, who said: "I said to Ali (may Allah honor his face): 'Do you have a book that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) specifically gave you?' He said: 'No, except the Book of Allah, or an understanding granted to a Muslim man, or what is in this scroll.' And it was hanging from the hilt of his sword. I said: 'And what is in this scroll?' He said: 'The 'Aql (blood money/intellect), the release of the captive, and that no Muslim should be killed for a disbeliever.'"

It is understood from this, as al-Qastallani said, the permissibility for the scholar to extract from the Quran by his understanding what was not transmitted from the exegetes, if it agrees with the foundations of the Law. Everything the Sufis possess, according to what I say, is of this kind, except that the outward appearance of some of their words contradicts what the glorious Law has brought. However, they are based on terminologies among themselves; if the intent behind them is known, the dust clears. Whether they are blameworthy for those terminologies—due to the saying of Ali (may Allah honor his face) in Sahih al-Bukhari: "Speak to people of what they know; do you want Allah and His Messenger to be belied?"—or whether they are not blameworthy because they have a motive for that, according to what the good opinion of them requires, is another research we are not currently addressing.

Close to the report of Abu Juhayfah is what Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from 'Antara, who said: "I was with Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) when a man came to him and said: 'People come to us and tell us that you have something the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not manifest to the people.' He said: 'Do you not know that Allah the Exalted said: "O Messenger, convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord"? By Allah, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did not leave us any black in white [i.e., any written legacy].'"

The vessel of Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) which he did not disseminate is not specifically for the science of secrets, for it is possible that the intent behind it was the news of tribulations, the signs of the Hour, and what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) informed of regarding the corruption of the religion at the hands of boys from the foolish among the Quraish. Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) used to say: "If I wanted to name them by their names, I would have." Or the intent was the hadiths which contain the naming of the oppressive rulers, their conditions, and their condemnation. He used to allude to some of that and not speak explicitly, fearing for his own self from them by saying: "I seek refuge in Allah the Exalted from the head of sixty and the rule of the boys," pointing to the caliphate of Yazid the Outcast—may Allah curse him despite the resentment of his supporters—because it was in the year sixty of the Hijrah, and Allah the Exalted answered the prayer of Abu Hurairah, for he died a year before it.

Also, al-Qastallani said: "If it were so, it would not have been permissible for Abu Hurairah to conceal it, despite what al-Bukhari narrated from him that he said: 'People say: Abu Hurairah has narrated too many hadiths. Were it not for two verses in the Book of Allah, I would not have narrated a single hadith.' Then he recited: 'Indeed, those who conceal what We have revealed of clear proofs and guidance...' to the end of His saying: '...the Merciful.' For his recitation of it is evidence for the condemnation of concealing knowledge, especially the knowledge which they call the science of secrets, as many of them claim it is the pith of the fruit of knowledge. Furthermore, Abu Hurairah denied the dissemination of that vessel generally, without specifying. So how can it be used as evidence for that? And Abu Hurairah did not reveal what he had kept hidden, as far as I know. So where is it known that what he knew is this? And whoever claims it, upon him is the burden of proof, otherwise necks are to be severed."

Therefore, using that report as evidence for the path of the people has its [problems]. The same applies to what was narrated from Zayn al-Abidin (may Allah be pleased with him). Indeed, the people have a basis other than this, explained in its proper place, but it is not conceded to anyone, whoever they may be, that what they are upon is something that the glorious Book of Allah is free of, or that it is a matter beyond the Law. Whoever tries to prove that by his claim has strayed far away. al-Sha'rani (may his secret be sanctified) said in al-Ajwiba al-Mardiyya 'an al-Fuqaha' wa al-Sufiyya: "I heard my master Ali al-Marsafi say: 'A man is not perfected in the station of knowledge and gnosis until he sees the Truth supporting the Law, and that Sufism is not something added to the Muhammadan Sunnah, but it is its very essence.' And I heard my master Ali al-Khawas say repeatedly: 'Whoever thinks that the Truth contradicts the Law or vice versa has acted out of ignorance, for the verifiers never hold a Truth that contradicts a Law. Indeed, they said: A Law without a Truth is empty, and a Truth without a Law is void.'" [This is] contrary to what the shortsighted among the jurists and the poor [Sufis] are upon.

Sometimes, one who claims the contradiction between Truth and Law relies on the story of al-Khidr with Moses (peace be upon them both). We will, God willing, verify that in a way that the opponent will not be able to open his lips against. From what we quoted from al-Qastallani regarding the report of Abu Juhayfah, the answer is known to what was said in objection to the Sufis: that what they have, if it agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, then they are before our eyes, and if it contradicts them, it is rejected against them, and there is nothing beyond the Truth except deviation. The answer is choosing the first part, and the fact that the Book and the Sunnah are before our eyes does not entail the impossibility of deducing something from them later, nor does it require that what is in them be limited to what the scholars knew before. So it is permissible for Allah the Exalted to grant some of His chosen servants an understanding by which they perceive from them what no one among the exegetes and jurists who strive in religion has attained. How much has the first left for the last! Since it is conceded to the four Imams, for example, their striving and extraction from the verses and hadiths despite some of them differing with others, what is the obstacle to conceding to the people [the Sufis] what has been opened for them of the meanings of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), even if it contradicts what some Imams are upon, as long as it does not contradict what the explicit consensus of the infallible community has been established upon? I see that differentiating between the two groups, despite the fact that the knowledge of each is established in acceptance and rejection, is purely arbitrary, as is not hidden from the fair-minded.

The Shia claimed that what is meant by "what has been revealed to you" is the caliphate of Ali (may Allah honor his face). They narrated with their chains of transmission from Abu Ja'far and Abu Abdillah (may Allah be pleased with them both) that Allah the Exalted revealed to His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to appoint Ali (may Allah honor his face) as his successor. He was afraid that this would be difficult for a group of his companions, so Allah the Exalted revealed this verse as an encouragement to him—peace and blessings be upon him—by commanding him to perform it.

From Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) who said: "This verse was revealed regarding Ali (may Allah honor his face), when the Exalted commanded him to inform the people of his leadership (Wilayah). The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) feared that they would say: 'He favors his cousin,' and that they would criticize him for that. So Allah the Exalted revealed this verse to him, and he stood for his leadership on the day of Ghadir Khumm and took his hand and said—peace and blessings be upon him: 'Whosoever I am his Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla. O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him.'"

al-Jalal al-Suyuti brought forth in al-Durr al-Manthur from Abu Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh, and Ibn 'Asakir, narrating from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri who said: "This verse was revealed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) on the day of Ghadir Khumm regarding Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah honor his face)." Ibn Mardawayh narrated from Ibn Mas'ud: "We used to recite during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): 'O Messenger, convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord, that Ali is the Leader of the believers, and if you do not do it, then you have not conveyed His message.'"

The report of Ghadir is the foundation of their evidence for the caliphate of the Commander (may Allah honor his face). They have added to it, to complete their purpose, abominable additions, inserted forged words in the middle of it, composed poetry about it, and attacked the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) based on their claim that they opposed the text of the Chosen Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Isma'il ibn Muhammad al-Himyari—may Allah deal with him with His justice—said in a long poem: "I marveled at a people who came to Ahmad with a plan that had no place. They said to him: 'If you wish, inform us of who is the goal and the resort when you pass away and depart from us,' while among them are those who covet the kingdom. He said: 'If I inform you of a resort, you would perhaps do in it as the people of the Calf did when they parted from Aaron.' ... Then a command came to him after that from his Lord, which has no repeller: 'Convey, or else you are not a conveyer,' and Allah is their protector who prevents [harm]. Then the Prophet stood, who was obedient to what he was commanded, preaching while commanded, and in his palm was the palm of Ali, its light shining, lifting it—how noble is the hand that lifts and the hand that is lifted! 'Whosoever I am his Mawla, then this one is his *Mawla'..."

And he continues to the end of what he said—may Allah the Exalted not forgive his slip, nor grant him pardon. You know that the reports of Ghadir which contain the command for succession are not authentic according to the Ahl al-Sunnah, nor are they conceded by them at all. We shall explain what happened there with the most complete explanation, clarify the dross from the pure, and then return to invalidating the deduction of the Shia. From Allah the Exalted is the seeking of help, and upon Him is the reliance.

We say: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) preached in a place between Makkah and Madinah upon his return from the Farewell Pilgrimage, near al-Juhfah, called Ghadir Khumm. In it, he clarified the virtue of Ali (may Allah honor his face) and the innocence of his reputation from what some who were with him in Yemen had spoken, due to what had transpired of the fairness which some thought was injustice, restriction, and stinginess—and the truth was with Ali (may Allah honor his face) in that. This was on Sunday, the 18th of Dhu al-Hijjah, under a tree there.

Muhammad ibn Ishaq narrated from Yahya ibn Abdillah from Yazid ibn Talha who said: "When Ali (may Allah honor his face) approached from Yemen to meet the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in Makkah, he hastened to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and appointed a man from his companions as his deputy over the army that was with him. That man proceeded and clothed every man with a suit from the textiles that were with Ali (may Allah honor his face). When his army approached, he went out to meet them, and lo, they were wearing the suits. He said: 'Woe to you, what is this?' They said: 'I clothed the people so they could adorn themselves when they arrived among the people.' He said: 'Woe to you, take them off before we arrive at the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).' He said: So he stripped the suits from the people and returned them to the textiles, and the army manifested their complaint for what he had done to them."

He narrated from Zaynab bint Ka'b—who was with Abu Sa'id al-Khudri—from Abu Sa'id, who said: "The people complained about Ali (may Allah honor his face), so the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) stood among us as a preacher, and I heard him say: 'O people, do not complain about Ali, for by Allah, he is harsh in the cause of Allah the Exalted, or in the way of Allah the Exalted.'" This was narrated by Imam Ahmad. He also narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) from Buraydah al-Aslami, who said: "I fought in Yemen with Ali and saw from him an aloofness. When I arrived at the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), I mentioned Ali (may Allah honor his face), and I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had changed. He said: 'O Buraydah, am I not closer to the believers than their own selves?' I said: 'Yes, O Messenger of Allah.' He said: 'Whosoever I am his Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla.'" This was also narrated by al-Nasa'i with a good and strong chain of transmission; all its narrators are trustworthy.

It was narrated with another chain of transmission, which he was unique in, and al-Dhahabi said: "It is authentic," from Zayd ibn Arqam who said: "When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) returned from the Farewell Pilgrimage and alighted at Ghadir Khumm, he commanded that trees be cleared, and they were. Then he said: 'It is as if I have been called and I have responded. Verily, I have left among you the two weightier things: the Book of Allah the Exalted and my offspring, my family. So look at how you succeed me in them, for they will not separate until they meet me at the Fountain. Allah the Exalted is my Mawla, and I am the Wali (guardian) of every believer.' Then he took the hand of Ali (may Allah honor his face) and said: 'Whosoever I am his Mawla, then this one is his Wali. O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him.' There was no one among the trees except that he saw him with his eyes and heard him with his ears."

Ibn Jarir narrated from Ali ibn Zayd, Abu Harun al-'Abdi, and Musa ibn 'Uthman from al-Bara' who said: "We were with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) on the Farewell Pilgrimage. When we came to Ghadir Khumm, the ground was cleared for the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) under two trees, and it was announced to the people: 'The prayer is gathering.' The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) called Ali (may Allah honor his face), took his hand, and raised him to his right side and said: 'Am I not closer to every person than himself?' They said: 'Yes.' He said: 'Verily, this is the Mawla of whomever I am his Mawla. O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him.' Then Umar ibn al-Khattab met him and said—may Allah be pleased with him—: 'Congratulations to you, you have become—morning and evening—the Mawla of every believer and believing woman.'" This is weak, for they have stated that Ali ibn Zayd, Abu Harun, and Musa are weak and their narration cannot be relied upon. In the chain is also Abu Ishaq, who is a Shia, and his narration is rejected.

Dhamra narrated with his chain from Abu Hurairah, who said: "When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) took the hand of Ali (may Allah honor his face), he said: 'Whosoever I am his Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla,' so Allah the Exalted revealed: 'Today I have perfected for you your religion.' Abu Hurairah said: 'And it is the day of Ghadir Khumm, and whoever fasts on the eighteenth of Dhu al-Hijjah, Allah the Exalted writes for him the fasting of sixty months.'" This is a very abominable hadith, and it was stated in al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya that it is fabricated.

Abu Ja'far ibn Jarir al-Tabari paid attention to the hadith of Ghadir, collecting in it two volumes in which he brought forth all its chains and wordings, and he drove both the dross and the pure, the authentic and the sick, as is the custom of many of the hadith scholars; for they bring forth what occurs to them on the subject without distinguishing between the authentic and the weak. Likewise, the great memorizer Abu al-Qasim ibn 'Asakir brought forth many hadiths on this sermon. The reliable part in it is what we have pointed to, and its likes which do not contain the report of succession as the Shia claim. According to al-Dhahabi, "Whosoever I am his Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla" is mutawatir (mass-transmitted); it is certain that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said it. As for "O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him," it is an addition with a strong chain. As for the fasting of the eighteenth of Dhu al-Hijjah, it is not authentic; by Allah, that verse was not revealed except on the Day of Arafah, days before Ghadir Khumm.

The two Sheikhs (Bukhari and Muslim) did not narrate the report of Ghadir in their Sahihs because they did not find it according to their conditions. The Shia claimed that this was due to their shortcoming and prejudice, but they are far above that. The way the Shia deduce from the report "Whosoever I am his Mawla, then Ali is his Mawla" is that Mawla means "the one more entitled to exercise authority (Awla bi-al-tasarruf)," and the right to exercise authority is the essence of Imamate. It is not hidden that the first [thing] in this deduction is their making Mawla mean "the one more entitled (Awla)." This was denied by all philologists; rather, they said: "A maf'al form never comes with the meaning of af'al at all." No one permitted that except Abu Zayd the linguist, clinging to the saying of Abu 'Ubaydah in the interpretation of the saying of the Exalted: "It is your Mawla (protector/abode)," meaning "more entitled to you." This was rejected by saying that it necessitates the correctness of "So-and-so is Mawla than so-and-so," just as it is correct to say "So-and-so is Awla (more entitled) than so-and-so," and the necessary [consequent] is invalid by consensus, so the antecedent is likewise. And the interpretation of Abu 'Ubaydah is an explanation of the resulting meaning—meaning the Fire is your place of settling and your destiny, and the place befitting you—and it is not a text that the word Mawla there means "more entitled."

The second: If we conceded that Mawla means "more entitled," it does not necessitate that it is entitlement to exercise authority. Rather, it is possible that the meaning is "more entitled to love" or "more entitled to veneration," and so on. How many times has Awla come in speech where the estimation of "exercise authority" is not correct, such as His saying: "Indeed, the most entitled of people to Abraham are those who followed him [and this prophet and those who believe]." On the basis that we have two evidences for the intent behind the Wilayah (guardianship) from the word Mawla or Awla [being] love: one of them is what we narrated from Muhammad ibn Ishaq regarding the complaint of those who were with the Commander (may Allah honor his face) in Yemen, like Buraydah al-Aslami, Khalid ibn al-Walid, and others. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not forbid the complainers specifically, [but] exaggerated in requesting his love and being gentle in the call to it, as is usual in his affair (peace and blessings be upon him) in such [cases]. Because of the mentioned gentleness, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) opened the sermon by saying: "Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves?"

The second: His saying—peace and blessings be upon him—according to some narrations: "O Allah, befriend whoever befriends him, and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him." For if the intent behind Mawla was the one who exercises authority in affairs or is more entitled to exercise authority, he would have said—peace and blessings be upon him—: "O Allah, befriend whoever is under his authority and be hostile to whoever is not." Since the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned love and hostility, he indicated that the intent is to obligate love for him—may Allah honor his face—and to warn against being hostile to him and hating him, not [the exercise of] authority and its absence. If the intent were the caliphate, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) would have stated it explicitly.

This is supported by what Abu Nu'aym narrated from al-Hasan al-Muthanna ibn al-Hasan al-Sibt (may Allah be pleased with them both) that they asked him about this report: "Is it a text for the caliphate of the Commander (may Allah honor his face)?" He said: "If the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had intended his caliphate, he would have said: 'O people, this is the guardian of my affair and the one who will stand over you after me, so listen and obey.'" Then al-Hasan said: "I swear by Allah the Exalted, if Allah the Exalted and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had preferred Ali for this affair and the Commander (may Allah honor his face) had not been advanced before him, he would have been the most erroneous of people." Also, it is perhaps argued that the intent by Wilayah is love, because there was no restriction with the phrase "after me." The appearance then is the meeting of the two Wilayahs in one time, and the meeting is not imagined on the condition that the meaning be "entitlement to exercise authority," unlike if the intent were love.

The Shia grasped at the proof that the meaning of Mawla is "the one more entitled to exercise authority" by the word occurring in the beginning of the report according to one of the narrations, which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): "Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves?" We say: The intent of this is also "more entitled to love"—meaning: Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves in love?—so that the parts of the speech harmonize and the arrangement becomes good. The result of the meaning becomes thus: "O assembly of believers, you love me more than your own selves, so whoever loves me, let him love Ali. O Allah, love whoever loves him and be hostile to whoever is hostile to him."

What guides to the fact that the intent of "more entitled" in that phrase is not "the one more entitled to exercise authority" is that it is taken from His saying: "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers, and those of [blood] relationship are more entitled to one another in the Book of Allah." This is brought for the negation of the lineage of the adopted children. Its explanation is: Zayd ibn Harithah should not be called the son of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), because the relation of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to all believers is like a compassionate father, or even more, and his wives (peace be upon him) are their mothers, and the relatives by blood are more entitled than others. Even if the compassion and veneration for foreigners is greater, the orbit of lineage is upon kinship—and it is missing in the adopted ones—not upon compassion and veneration. This is what is in the Book of Allah the Exalted, meaning in His ruling, and there is no entry for the meaning of "more entitled to exercise authority" in the intent at all. So the intent in what we are in is the meaning that was intended in the [verse] from which it was taken. Even if we assumed that "more entitled" in the beginning of the report means "more entitled to exercise authority," it is possible that this is to alert the addressees of that sermon so they would turn to listen to his speech (peace and blessings be upon him) with complete attention and focus upon him, so he would establish what is in it of guidance in the most complete establishment. This is just as a man says to his children in the place of preaching and advice: "Am I not your father?" And when they confess that, he commands them with what he intends from them, so they accept by the rule of fatherhood and guidance and act according to them. So his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) in this place: "Am I not closer to the believers than their own selves?" is like "Am I not the Messenger of Allah the Exalted to you?" or "Am I not your prophet?" It is not possible to conduct such a thing in what follows it to attain the appropriateness.

Some Shia brought forth an evidence for the negation of love, which is: that the love of the Commander (may Allah honor his face) is a matter established within the verse: "The believing men and believing women are allies of one another." If this hadith conveyed that meaning, it would be redundant. Its corruption is not hidden, and its origin is that the deducer did not understand that obligating the love of someone within generality is one thing, and obligating his love specifically is another thing. The difference between them is as clear as the sun. What increases this clarity is that if a person believed in all the prophets of Allah and His messengers (peace and blessings be upon them) and did not specifically mention our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) by name, his faith would not be considered. Also, if we assumed the unity of the content of the verse and the report, redundancy does not necessarily follow; rather, the maximum that follows is reinforcement and confirmation, and that is the function of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). He (peace and blessings be upon him) often confirmed the contents of the Quran and established them. Indeed, in the Quran itself, contents have been repeated for that [purpose], and no one has said that this is from redundancy, God forbid. Also, the specification of the Imamate of the Commander (may Allah honor his face) has been repeated time and again according to the Shia; so, on the condition of the validity of that, the redundant statement follows, and the speech of the Lawgiver is [thus] absolved.

Then, what al-Himyari pointed to in his poem—in which he went to extremes—that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in this social assembly and requested from him the appointment of the Imam after him, is something that the historians and the biographers from both teams did not mention, as far as I know. Rather, it is pure falsehood and slander—we seek refuge in Allah the Exalted from it. Whoever came upon that abominable poem in its entirety, and what the Shia narrate in it, and had the slightest experience, saw wonders of wonders and realized that the rattling of the people is like the creaking of a door or the buzzing of a fly.

Then, the reports narrated by the path of Ahl al-Sunnah indicating that this verse was revealed regarding Ali (may Allah honor his face)—on the condition of their authenticity and being of a rank that they can be used as evidence—do not contain more than the indication of his virtue—may Allah honor his face—and that he is the Wali of the believers in the meaning we have established. We do not deny that, and cursed is he who denies it. Likewise, what Ibn Mardawayh narrated from Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with them) does not contain more than that. The specification of him—may Allah honor his face—by mention is for what we have already mentioned.

Some of our scholars said by way of concession: If the verse is according to the report of Ibn Mas'ud, and likewise the report of Ghadir according to the famous narration, on the condition of their indication that the intent is "more entitled to exercise authority," they must be qualified by what indicates that in the end. At that time, welcome to the agreement, for Ahl al-Sunnah are saying that at the time of his Imamate. The reason for specifying the Commander (may Allah honor his face) by mention at that time is what he—peace and blessings be upon him—knew by revelation of the occurrence of corruption and oppression in the time of his caliphate, and the denial of some people of his rightful Imamate. That it occurred after the death without interruption is not indicated by it, and the report beginning with "It is as if I have been called and I have responded" is not a text for the intent, as is not hidden.

What makes the Shia's claim—that the verse was revealed in the specific caliphate of Ali (may Allah honor his face) and that the relative noun in it is specific—far-fetched is His saying: "And Allah will protect you from the people." For "the people" in it, even if it is general, the intent behind them is the disbelievers. "And He guides you to Him" [i.e., He guides not the disbelieving people]—this is in the place of the cause for his protection (peace and blessings be upon him). In it is the establishment of the manifest [noun] in the place of the pronoun, meaning: "Because Allah the Exalted does not guide them to their wish regarding you." When did the intent behind them become the disbelievers after the intent of the caliphate? Rather, if it were said: it is not far-fetched, because the fear which the Shia claim from him (peace and blessings be upon him)—God forbid—in conveying the affair of the caliphate is only from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), since there are among them—God forbid—those who covet it for themselves. And when he sees his deprivation of it, it is not far-fetched for him to intend harm to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and to commit the saying—God forbid—to the disbelief of those who hinted by attributing covetousness in the caliphate to him, which necessitates total dangers, the easiest of which is declaring the Commander (may Allah honor his face) a sinner—and he is he!—or attributing cowardice to him—and he is the Lion of Allah the Exalted, the Victorious!—or judging him with taqiyyah—and he is the one who the blame of the blamer does not take in Allah, and he does not fear anyone except Allah the Exalted—or attributing the act of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), or rather the Divine command, to vanity. And all of it is as you see.

It is not said: "We have two matters that indicate that the intent behind the relative noun is the caliphate. One of them is that he (peace and blessings be upon him) was commanded with the most eloquent expression to convey the legal rulings that he is commanded with, as He—the Glorious—said, addressing him—peace and blessings be upon him: 'So proclaim that which you are commanded and turn away from the polytheists.' If the intent here were not the most important of the individuals and the greatest in affair—and that is nothing but the caliphate, for by it the affair of religion and the world is organized—the speech would be devoid of benefit."

The second: That Ibn Ishaq mentioned in his biography that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) preached to the people on the Farewell Pilgrimage his sermon in which he clarified what he clarified. He praised Allah the Exalted and extolled Him, then said: "O people, listen to my saying, for I do not know—perhaps I will not meet you after this year of mine at this station ever. O people, your blood and your wealth are forbidden to you until you meet your Lord, like the sanctity of this day of yours, and like the sanctity of this month of yours. You will meet your Lord, and He will ask you about your deeds. I have conveyed." Then he advised—peace and blessings be upon him—the women, then he said—peace and blessings be upon him: "So understand my saying, for I have conveyed. I have left among you what, if you hold fast to it, you will never go astray: the Book of Allah the Exalted and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)." To the end, he said—may my father and mother be sacrificed for him (peace and blessings be upon him): "O Allah, have I conveyed?" He said: Ibn Ishaq said: "It was mentioned to me that the people said: 'O Allah, yes.' So the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: 'O Allah, bear witness.'" End quote.

This narration is manifest that the sermon was on the Day of Arafah, the day of the Greatest Pilgrimage, as in the narration of Yahya ibn 'Abbad ibn Abdillah ibn al-Zubayr, and the day of Ghadir was the eighteenth of Dhu al-Hijjah after he (peace and blessings be upon him) finished the matter of the rites and turned toward the enlightened Madinah. In this case, the commanded [thing] to be conveyed would be another matter other than what he (peace and blessings be upon him) conveyed before and the people witnessed his conveying and he made Allah the Exalted bear witness to that. And this is nothing but the Great Caliphate and the Supreme Imamate. It is as if He—the Exalted—is saying: "O Messenger, convey that Ali (may Allah honor his face) is your successor and the one who stands in your place after you, and if you do not do it, then you have not conveyed His message." And even if the people said to you when you said: "O Allah, have I conveyed?" "O Allah, yes," we say: The conditional in the first matter, after closing the eyes from what is in it, is forbidden because of the possibility that the intent behind the relative noun in the two verses is the legal rulings related to the interests of the servants in their livelihood and their afterlife. There is no necessity for the absence of benefit, for how many a verse has been repeated in the Quran, and commands and prohibitions mentioned repeatedly for confirmation and establishment? Moreover, some mentioned that the benefit of the command here is removing the delusion that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) left or would leave the conveyance of anything of the revelation out of taqiyyah.

Two matters oppose the second matter: The first is that the fact that the day of Ghadir was after the day of Arafah is conceded, but we do not concede that the verse was revealed on it so that the commanded [thing] to be conveyed is another matter. Rather, what the appearance of the sermon and the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in it "O Allah, have I conveyed?" requires is that the verse was revealed before the two days of Ghadir and Arafah. What was brought forth in more than one account that Surat al-Ma'idah was revealed between Makkah and Madinah on the Farewell Pilgrimage does not serve as evidence for the posteriority nor the priority, for it does not contain the mention of the return nor the departure. The appearance of his state (peace and blessings be upon him) on that pilgrimage—from showing the rites and setting aside usury and the blood of the pre-Islamic era and other things which would take too long to mention, and the biographers have mentioned them—guides that the revelation was during the departure.

The second: If we conceded that the revelation was on the day of Ghadir, we would not concede that what is commanded to be conveyed is another matter. The maximum that follows is the necessity of repetition, and you have known its benefit and the frequency of its occurrence. If we conceded that the commanded [thing] to be conveyed is another matter, we would not concede that it is nothing but the caliphate. How much has he (peace and blessings be upon him) conveyed after that of other verses revealed to him (peace and blessings be upon him)! What is understood from some reports is that this verse was before the Farewell Pilgrimage. Ibn Mardawayh and al-Diya' in al-Mukhtara narrated from Ibn Abbas, who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was asked: 'Which verse revealed from the sky was most difficult for you?' He said: 'I was in Mina during the days of the season, and the polytheists of the Arabs and the rest of the people gathered in the season. Then Gabriel (peace be upon him) was revealed to me and said: "O Messenger, convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not do it, then you have not conveyed His message." He said: So I stood at the 'Aqaba and called: "O people, who will help me so that I may convey the messages of my Lord, and for you is Paradise? O people, say: There is no god but Allah, and I am the Messenger of Allah to you; you will succeed and prosper, and for you is Paradise." He said—peace be upon him—: So no man, woman, maid, or boy remained except that they threw dirt and stones at me and said: "A liar, a renegade." Then a visitor came to me and said: "O Muhammad, if you are the Messenger of Allah, it is time for you to invoke against them as Noah invoked against his people for destruction." The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, guide my people, for they do not know, and help me against them, that they may answer me in Your obedience." Then al-'Abbas his uncle came and saved him from them and drove them away from him.'"

al-A'mash said: "By this, the Banu al-'Abbas boast and say: 'Regarding them it was revealed: "Indeed, you do not guide whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills." The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) desired Abu Talib, and Allah the Exalted willed for al-'Abbas ibn 'Abd al-Muttalib.'"

More explicit than this is what Abu al-Shaykh, Abu Nu'aym in al-Dala'il, Ibn Mardawayh, and Ibn 'Asakir narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), who said: "The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to be guarded, and his uncle Abu Talib used to send with him every day men from Banu Hashim to guard him, until 'And Allah will protect you from the people' was revealed. So his uncle wanted to send with him those who would guard him, and he said: 'O uncle, Allah the Mighty and Majestic has protected me.'" Abu Talib died before the Hijrah, and the Farewell Pilgrimage was much later. The appearance is the connection of the verse. Some say the verse was revealed at night, based on what 'Abd ibn Humayd, al-Tirmidhi, al-Bayhaqi, and others narrated from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), who said: "The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to be guarded, until 'And Allah will protect you from the people' was revealed. So he put his head out of the dome and said: 'O people, disperse, for Allah the Exalted has protected me.'" It is not hidden that it is not a text for the intent.

What I lean toward, in reconciling the reports, is that this verse is one of those whose revelation was repeated, and Allah the Exalted knows best. The intent by "protection from the people" is the safeguarding of his soul—peace and blessings be upon him—from killing and destruction. So it is not objected that he—peace and blessings be upon him—had his noble face wounded and his canine tooth broken on the day of Uhud. Some went to the generality and claimed that the verses were revealed after Uhud. Both were problematized by the fact that the Jews poisoned him—peace and blessings be upon him—to the point that he said: "The morsel of Khaybar continues to return to me, and this is the time when it has severed my aorta." It was answered that He—the Exalted and Majestic—guaranteed him protection from killing and its likes by reason of conveying the revelation. As for what was done to him (peace and blessings be upon him) and to the prophets (peace be upon them), it was for the defense of wealth, lands, and souls; its distance [from the meaning of protection] is not hidden.

al-Raghib said: "The protection of the prophets (peace be upon them) is their safeguarding by what they were specifically given of the purity of essence, then by what He bestowed upon them of morals and virtues, then by victory and the firming of their steps, then by sending down tranquility upon them, and by the safeguarding of their hearts and by success." It is said: The intent by "protection" is the safeguarding from the occurrence of sin. The meaning is: Convey, and Allah the Exalted will grant you the safeguarding from the occurrence of sin from among the people—meaning He will protect you by reason of that instead of them. It is not hidden that this is a direction that did not come except from one whom Allah the Exalted did not protect from error. Similar to it is what was narrated from Ali ibn 'Isa regarding the saying of the Exalted: "Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people," where he said: "He does not guide them by aid, success, and kindness to disbelief, but rather He guides them to faith." He claimed that what called him to this interpretation is that Allah the Exalted guided the disbelievers to faith by pointing them to it, making them desire it, and warning them against opposing it. You have already known the intent behind the verse, while there is in his speech what is not hidden of examination. al-Jubba'i said: "The intent is: He does not guide them to Paradise and reward." In it is negligence of the fact that the sentence is in the place of the cause. Some claimed that the intent is that upon you is the conveyance, not the guidance; so whoever you have decreed to disbelief and death, he will never be guided. It is as you see. So understand all that we have mentioned in this verse and memorize it, for I do not think you will find it in a book.

Nafi', Ibn 'Amir, and Abu Bakr from 'Asim read "His message" (on the singular/all). The placing of the verse in the midst of the verse revealed regarding the People of the Book is because all of them are severe warnings whose hearing displeases the disbelievers and whose face-to-face addressing is difficult for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), especially what follows it of the text condemning them for the perfection of their deviation. For that reason, the command was repeated, so the Exalted said:...