Do the Shi’ite Muslims Say That the
Revelation Came to Muhammad by
Mistake, and That it Was Intended for
Ali?
This is a vicious lie widely spread in Egypt, Saudi
Arabia, and other Arab countries in order to
discredit the followers of the members of the
House of the Prophet. This accusation was made
during periods of oppression against the Shi’ites.
The rulers of the periods of the Umayyads and
Abbasids used to consider every follower of the
Members of the House of the Prophet revolutionary
and dangerous. They conspired against these
Shi’ites and accused them of heresy and disbelief in
order to encourage the Muslims to shed their blood
and usurp their rights and wealth.
The centuries of oppression passed with all their
injustices and terrors. It was expected that during
the new period of freedom, the mistakes of the past
would be corrected. It was hoped that the Muslim
scholars would make a serious study in order to
see if there is any justification for such terrible
accusations.
It is very easy to know the truth.
There are hundreds of books written by Shi’ite
scholars about their beliefs. Had the Sunni scholars
read any of these books, they would have found
that the Shi’ite beliefs are in full agreement with the
Book of God and the well-known statements of the
Prophet.
We are living in the era of speed and easy
movement. It is easy for Muslim scholars to have
conferences, discuss problems, and find solutions.
The simplest principle of justice is to follow the
commandments of the Holy Qur’an:
"Oh you who believe, if a transgressor
comes to you with news, try to verify it,
lest you inflict damage on people
unwittingly; then you may consequently
regret your hasty action" (ch. 49, v.6).
The Almighty commanded us to try to find out
whether an accusation is true or false, and that we
ought not to try people and convict them without
questioning them.
We do not know of any court in the world in which
the judge convicts a person before interviewing
him, provided the accused is available and honors
the summons.
In spite of the ease with which one can find the
correct information nowadays, we find that those
who accuse and spread hatred among Muslims do
not take one single step in order to find the truth
which may unite the Muslim world.
While writing these words, I recollect that the
Egyptian government during the fifties sent the late
Dr. Muhammad Bisar to Washington, D.C., as
director of the Islamic Center there. I went to visit
him and he received me kindly and informed me of
the knowledge he had acquired concerning
American Muslims. He initiated a dialogue between
us, saying:
"Some of the Muslims in this country
asked me about the various Islamic
sects. I declared to them that all Muslim
sects are good except the Shi'ite Ithna
'ashari."
I immediately realized that Dr. Bisar did not know
the meaning of the Shi’ite Ithna 'ashari. Otherwise,
he would not have been rude enough to say that to
me while I am a Shi’ite Ithna 'ashari. Thus, we had
the following dialogue:
Chirri: What is wrong with the Ithna 'ashari?
Bisar: They believe in things opposed to Islam.
Chirri: Give us an example of their wrong belief.
Bisar: They say the revelation came to Muhammad
by mistake, and that Ali Ibn Abi Talib was
supposed to receive the revelation.
Chirri: How did you learn that?
Bisar: I read it in the book of Al-milal wa al-nihal
by al-Shahrastani.
Chirri: Have you asked any Shi’ite scholar about
this subject?
Bisar: No, I have not.
Chirri: Then you have convicted millions of
Muslims and considered them “kafir” without
asking any of them about this serious accusation.
Did the Almighty command you to do that? And
did Egypt send you to propagate such a vicious
message?
A year after our meeting in Washington, I met Dr.
Bisar in Philadelphia at an Islamic conference. He
informed me that he re-examined the book of
AI-milal wa al-nihal by al-Shahrastani and found
that what was attributed to the Shi’ites, that the
revelation came to Muhammad by mistake, was not
the belief of the Ithna 'ashari Shi’ite school of
thought. It was, rather, a sect which existed and
disappeared hundreds of years ago. Hearing that
from him, I accepted his apology. Yet, I was
amazed that it took him a whole year to re-read the
book and discover the truth.
I spent years studying hadith and Islamic history
books which were written by Sunni and Ithna
'ashari scholars. I never found in any Shi’ite book a
hadith or historical report indicating that Ali Ibn Abi
Talib was higher than or equal to Muhammad. As a
matter of fact, I found only the opposite. The
Shi’ites consider Ali to be the best man after the
Messenger because he was the most obedient to
him.
One of the hadiths which the Shi’ites pride
themselves upon is a hadith attributed to the
Messenger of God. The Prophet said to the tribe of
Wulay’ah:
"Bani Wulay'ah, you must change your
attitude, or I shall send to you a man
who is from me to punish you severely."
Some of the people who were present asked the
Prophet “Who is the man you are going to send to
them?” The Prophet replied: “He is the man who
was patching the sole of my shoes.” They looked
around and found Ali patching the sole of the
Prophet’s shoes.
It is inconceivable that the Shi’ites can be proud of
the fact that Ali was the patcher of the Prophet
Muhammad’s shoes and claim that the Imam is
higher than or equal to the Prophet. Therefore, I do
not find any justification for directing such an
accusation at the Shi’ites who glorify the Prophet
the most.
The Shi’ites say that the highest honor the Imam Ali
acquired is that he was chosen by the Prophet to be
his brother. When the Prophet commanded every
two Muslims to become brothers, he held Ali’s
hand and said “This is my brother.” Thus, the
Messenger of God, the highest Messenger, the
Imam of all righteous people, the one who had no
equal among the servants of God, made Ali his
brother. (Al-Seerah al-Nabawiyyah, by Ibn
Hisham, part 1, page 505).
Are The Sunnites Clear Of Exaggeration?
Certainly the Shi’ites are not extremist, and there is
no hadith reported by the Shi’ites that may justify
such an accusation. However, it would not be
improper to ask the following question: Are the
Sunnites and their scholars free of exaggeration and
extremism concerning the position of some
prominent companions of the Prophet?
It would not be out of place to say that the Sunnites
are closer to extremism than the Shi’ites. We find in
the books of the Sunni scholars and hadith
recorders indications that they put 'Umar in a
position higher than that of the Messenger of God.
The following are some of the hadiths:
"Al-Hakim Al-Nisaburi (in his book AI-Mustadrak,
part 3, page 84), reported that Ubayy Ibn Ka’b said
the following:
"I heard the Messenger of God saying:
The first one the Almighty will embrace
on the Day of Judgement is 'Umar. The
first one the Lord will shake hands with
will be 'Umar, and the first one the
Almighty takes by His hand and admits
to paradise is 'Umar."
Al-Hafiz Muhammad Ibn Majah in his authentic
Sunan reported that Ubayy Ibn Ka’b said:
"The Messenger of God said: The first
one God will shake hands with (on the
Day of Judgement) will be 'Umar. The
first one God will greet is 'Umar, and he
is the first one Allah takes by His hand
and admits to paradise."
These hadiths clearly indicate that 'Umar will be
above all the Prophets including the head of the
Prophets, Muhammad. When 'Umar is to be the
first embraced and his hand shaken by the
Almighty, all the prophets will be after him.
This is a strange and astonishing hadith. It portrays
the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth as a
human who embraces people and shakes hands
with them.
Al-Hakim also reported that Jabir Ibn Abdullah said
that Abu Bakr said that he heard the Messenger say:
“The sun never rose on a man better than 'Umar.”
Al-Hakim said “This hadith is authentic.”
(AI-Mustadrak, part 3, page 90).
If the sun never rose on a man better than 'Umar, it
means that 'Umar was not less than any of the
Prophets of God including their highest,
Muhammad Ibn Abdullah.
It is reported among the virtues of 'Umar that the
Messenger of God said: “Whenever Gabriel
delayed in his visits to me, I guessed that he was
sent to 'Umar.” (Ibn Abi Al-Hadid, Vol.6, part 12,
page 178).
It is also reported that 'Umar is the lamp of the
people of paradise. (Ibn Hajar, Al Sawa’iq
AI-Muhriqah, page 97).
If the Prophet had been concerned whether Gabriel
could have visited 'Umar, 'Umar would have been
equal to the Prophet in position and would have
been a competitor. Furthermore, how could 'Umar
be the light of the people of paradise while the
Prophets, including the Messenger of God, are
among the people of paradise?
This means that the light of 'Umar is higher than the
light of all the prophets. Furthermore, if 'Umar is
the light of the people of paradise, and the width of
paradise is the Heaven and the Earth, it means that
'Umar’s light is the light of the universe. Should that
be the case, all the prophets would be in need of
his light, and that would mean that 'Umar is above
the messengers of God.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I do not
mean, through these hadiths, to accuse our Sunnite
brothers of placing 'Umar above the Final
Messenger of God and the rest of the prophets.
This is certainly not my intention; but I wanted to
say that what the Sunnites attributed to the Shi’ites,
that Ali is above Muhammad, is an unjustifiable and
vicious lie because there is nothing in the Shi’ite
books that indicates this allegation.
The Shi’ites consider the spread of such a lie a
flagrant aggression against the glory of Islam and
the honor of the Shi’ites.
I wanted to bring to the attention of the readers that
the Imamite Shi’ites are too righteous to accuse
their Sunnite brothers of placing a man above the
Prophet in spite of the fact that there are many
hadiths, which are considered by the Sunni
scholars to be authentic, indicating that 'Umar is
higher than the great Messenger and the messengers
who were before him.