Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

In the name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful

1- Prove that it is Authentic


2- Prove that it is Mutawater
3- Prove that it meant Imama
a. From the Hadith itself
b. From other Hadiths
c. From the usage of Imam Ali to the Hadith
d. From the understanding of Abu Ayoob
4- Answer their Answers
a. Mowla = Walaya = Helper
Wali = Wilaya = Caliph
b. It is related to the Yemen event
c. Why in Ghadeer Khum & not in Makka?
d. The prophet lost most of the people by delaying it
e. It is weak in the Shia books !!

The lecture is divided into three parts;


Part 1 Discussion of the chain of this Hadith and whether it is Mutawatir
Part 2 Discussion on the meaning of the Hadith
Part 3 Discussion of the Sunni claim and our replies

Part 1 Discussion of the chain of this Hadith and whether it is Mutawatir


We will mention who from among the Sunni scholars authenticated this Hadith.
There are many, however I will mention only two here;
The first is Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani, who is the master of hadith for the Sunnis.
In Fateh al Bari (explanation of Sahih Bukhari), volume 7, pg. 74; The hadith, Whoever I
am his Maula, Ali is his Maula, has been narrated by Al Tirmidhi, and al Nisaei and it has
many chains of narration, which ibn ukda gathered in one book. And many of its chains
are sahih and hasan (status under Sahih, but above weak).

( :

.)74/7 ) (

http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=2037&id=3816

He also says in another book,


Tahdhib al Tahdhib, volume 4, pg 213; Ibn Jareer Al Tabari has gathered this hadith in a
book, and it has doubles the number of people who have mentioned and authenticated
this hadith. And also Ibn Ukda paid special attention to gather this hadith in one book and
has narrated it from 70 companions or more.

: ... ( :


. )213/4 ) (

http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1852&id=2707

The second scholar we will mention is Sheikh Nasser ul Din Albaani. He says in the book,
Silsalat al Ahadeeth al Sahiha, volume 4, pg 343, hadith # 1750; He talks about Hadith Al
Ghadeer, mentions its chain of narrators and then says, this is what I was able to
ascertain about this hadith; the hadith makes the researchers certain that it is an authentic
hadith and that it produces knowledge (certainty). This hadith has alot of chains of
narrators, which Ibn Ukda collected it in a book. Ibn Hajar has said that some of those
chains are authentic and some are (hasan). To conclude, the two parts of this hadith are
Sahih (man kunthum maula fa hadha Ali un maula & allahuma wali man walah). And the
first part is Mutawatir. Any researcher can tell this if they looked at the chain of narrators,
and what I have mentioned is enough.

: ( )
...

108103 /9 " " :

". " :

"" :
)1750 343/4 ( .
He goes onto say,
If you know this, the reason why I mentioned this hadith and showing that it is authentic,
is because I have seen Ibn Taymiyyah weaken the first part of this hadith, and about the
second part he claimed that it is weak. He did this because of a habit of exaggeration of
being too hasty in weakening the Ahadeeth before collecting its chains and deeply looking
at them.




) ! 418417/4 " " : !!! (
.
)1750 343/4 (
We have quoted here two revered Sunni scholars who say this hadith is authentic. And
that is not all. If we check with more Sunni scholars, we see that they prove that the hadith
is Mutawatir (recurring hadith, one that has been narrated by a group of people who cannot
collude to lie, it is an undeniable hadith). So, this hadith is Mutawatir according to Sunni
scholars.
One of them is Al Dhahabi, who says in one of his letters titled,
Narrations of Hadith Man kunthu maula, pg 11, this hadith is Mutawatir hadith which
makes us certain that the prophet has mentioned it. Many narrators have narrated it with
lots of chains that has sahih, hasan, and dhaeef narrations.

:11

" ()
."

He also said in Tathkirat Al Hufaadh, volume 2, pg 713, he says Ibn Jareer Al Tabari
gathered this hadith in one book because Abu Dawood tried to weaken the chain, and he
proved that this hadith is authentic. Dhahabi then says, When I looked at this book, I was
amazed at the chains that this hadith has.

( :
. )713/2 ) (

http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1873&id=713

We also mentioned previously that Al Albani said that this hadith is Mutawatir. So, we are
done with the first part, and we have established that the hadith is Sahih & Mutawatir.

Part 2 - Discussion on the meaning of the Hadith


We will discuss some of the authentic Ahadeeth that have been mentioned in the Sunni
books;
Musnad Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, hadith # 18476: .Prophet asked the believers, Dont you
know that I am AWLA over the believers than they are over themselves? The believers
replied, Yes. After this he said, Then whoever I am his maula, Ali is his maula.

:18476




http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=18476&doc=6

Majma al Zawaid (for al Haithami), volume 9, pg 105: Prophet asks, Am I not AWLA on
the believers and my wives are their mothers? the believers replied, Yes. Prophet said,
Then whoever I am his maula, Ali is his maula. (Al Haithami says: its narrators are
reliable)

: ()
: : : ()
)105/9 ( . : .
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1403&id=17797

Sahih Sunan Ibn Maja (for al Albani), volume 1, pg 56, hadith #94 and #115: The Prophet
asked, Am I not AWLA on the believers than themselves? (He repeated this in a different
form) They replied, Yes. Then he said, Then this is the WALI of whomever I am his
maula. (Al Albani says: Authentic)

: :
: : : : : ()

)115 94 56/1 ( .

http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1683&id=93

Now lets focus on this statement Man kunthum maula fa hadha Ali un maula.
The Shia point of view: Prophet Mohammed transferred the rights of guardianship over
the Ummah to Imam Ali in this statement. (use of the word MAULA)
Sunni point of view: Prophet Mohammed is only saying, Whoever I am his helper, Ali is
his helper or whoever I am is friend, Ali is his friend.

However, if we want to understand this hadith, then we need to look at the whole context.
The main disagreement lies in the interpretation of the word MAULA.
Root of the word Maula = wali
This root can be used to create many words in many forms, such as awla, waali, wilayah,
maula etc. The Prophet used this root in three different sentences in this hadith.
The first time he used it is when he asked: Am I not AWLA over the believers?
The second time he used it is in: Whoever I am his MAULA, Ali is his MAULA.
The third time he used it in: May Allah be the WAALI of whosoever is the WAALI of Ali.
All three highlighted words have the same root; wali
In order to prove that the second word, MAULA means Guardian, we need to understand
the first sentence. Here the Prophet was actually referring to a verse from the Holy Quran;


)6 :33 (

[Shakir 33:6] The Prophet has a greater claim on the faithful than they have on
themselves, and his wives are (as) their mothers

Lets look at what the Sunni scholars have to say about the meaning of the word AWLA:
Shaykh Ibn Jareer Al Tabari, in his Tafseer, volume 11, pg 146
Ibn Jawzi in Zad al Maseer volume 6, pg 190
ibn kathir in his Thafseer, volume 3, pg 476
Al Shawkani in Fateh al Qader, volume 4, pg 301
All of the above scholars say that the word AWLA here means Guardian, which means
the person who has control over others; or he who has ownership on the believers more
than themselves. Such a person can make decisions for the believers without their
permission. So, we have proved that the first sentence in the hadith is referring to
Guardianship.
The prophet wanted the companions to acknowledge his guardianship; he wanted them
to admit that he indeed has more authority over them than they do to themselves. Once
they admitted this, he went on to say, Fa man kunthu maula fa hadha Ali un maula.
Our proof that Maula has the same meaning as Awla is
1. The context; those two sentences must be in context with each other. The prophet
asked the believers to admit something and then went onto make a statement.
This means there was a direct relationship between the two sentences.
2. To make it even clearer, the Prophet used the prefix Fa (Fa man kunthu maula)
before the sentence. Fa is the equivalent of then in Arabic. This further proves a
direct relation between the statements.
Conclusion: The Prophet must have used the same meaning in the two sentences;
otherwise it does not make sense to connect the two. Additionally, it would be a source of

immense confusion, why would he intend them to mean different and yet form a
relationship between them? (Specially that both, awla & maula, had the same root)
Sunnis will attempt at this point to bring in a relation between the third statement and 1st.
Third statement: (Allah humma waali min wala).
We tell them that the relation between the 1st and 2nd statements is already proven; now
the burden of proof is on them to establish a connection between the 1st and 3rd
statements.
They are not connected because, in the 1st statement, Prophet is addressing the Muslims.
Same case in the 2nd statement. However in the 3rd statement, he has changed direction,
he is now addressing Allah (swt). Therefore it is a new statement, a new issue.
We have proven the meaning of the hadith from the hadith itself. And next we will prove
the same meaning from other than the even of Ghadeer Khum, but still from the Sunni
sources.
Al Haithami authenticated the hadith in Majma al Zawaid, volume 9, pg 104 & Albaani said
this hadith is authentic in his book, Al Silsila al Sahiha, volume 4, pg 331:
(23 yrs after the death of the Prophet, after the death of Uthman & before Imam Ali became
the Caliph, when the Muslims wanted him to accept khalifath)
Imam Ali asked everyone to gather in the mosque as he wanted to ask them something.
Once everyone had gathered, he asked them, Whoever heard the Prophet say in
Ghadeer Khum what he said let him stand up?
30 companions seated in the mosque stood up, and admitted that they heard the Hadith.
The Narrator (Abu Al Tufail) then said, I left while something negative was in myself, and
then I met Zaid Ibn al Arqam (a companion) and told him about what Ive heard from Ali,
then Zaid ibn al Arqam said, Why do you deny this? I have heard the Prophet saying this.

() : () : : :
: :) ( :

: . () : :
14612104/9 ( .
)331/4
)331/4 ( . :
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1403&id=17794

If this hadith meant friendship why would Imam Ali bring it up 23 yrs after the death
of the Prophet? Why did he ask the companions to admit this? Why did he ask this

in the period when the issue of his Khilafah was being discussed? And why did the
narrator almost deny this hadith?
When we turn to the Quran;

)9:71 (

[Pickthal 9:71] And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends one of another

If he was referring to the ordinary friendship, then this verse already says that the believing
men and the believing women are protecting friends of each other. No need for Imam Ali
to repeat that, and no need for the companions to admit this, and nothing will cause the
narrator to have negative feelings toward this hadith. So, we can clearly conclude that he
was referring to Guardianship, in which he meant to say, I am not taking this right from
anybody, I already got this right from the Prophet, and I am accepting this position because
of my duty, not because anybody wants me to.
Why did the companions not follow this hadith?
Our answer is, wasnt the appointing of Prophet Mohammed established from the time of
the Christians and Jews? Did they not know he will be coming and he will be the final
prophet? Yet why did they not follow him? Similarly with the companions, it is their issue.
That is not an indication that there is a flaw in the hadith
Ahmed Ibn Hanbal narrated by an authentic chain in his Musnad Hadith #22461: A group
of people, one of them is Abu Ayub Ansari, came to Imam Ali and said Salamun Aleikum
Maulana
Imam Ali replied, Why do you call me Maula when you are Arab people? (Arab people
here means free, not slave)
They replied, Because weve heard the Prophet saying in Ghadeer Khum whoever I am
his maula, Ali is his maula.

:22461




http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=22461&doc=6


: 104 103 / 9 : 385 384 / 7 : 419 / 5 : (
: 126 / 3 : 1355 : 590 / 2 : 83 / 1 : 215 211 / 42
30 : 22 / 4053 4052 : 174 173 / 4 : 353 / 17

.)33 / 967 : 572 / 2 :


: : 340/4
.

Al Albaani said in his book, Al Silsala Al Sahiha Volume 4, pg 340: This chain is good, and
its narrators are reliable. Al Haithami also said in Majma Al Zawaed volume 9 pg 104: The
narrators of Ahmed are reliable.

. ... :
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1403&id=17792

Again this proves that the meaning of the word Maula in this context is Guardian, and not
friendship. Because Imam Ali said Why do you call me Maulana when you are free
people?, and the reply was that theyve understood that from Ghadeer Khum.
We have established the meaning of the hadith now and are done with the 2nd part of our
discussion.

Part 3 Discussing the claims of the Ahle Sunna and our replies
Question 1:
Maula = walaya = Helper, NOT Guardian
Waali = wilayah = Guardian
The Prophet could have used Waali to imply Guardianship, why did he use Maula?
One of the proofs they use is from the book, Lisaan Al Arab, which is somewhat a
dictionary. One of the famous Salafies who used this is Othman al Khamees. He went to
Lisaan Al Arab, and picks only one scholar, whos meaning of the word Maula agrees with
his own definition and uses that as proof.
Reply:
However if we were to refer to this book, under the word Maula, there are many other
scholars who disagree with this meaning (Maula = helper).
Here are some:
Ibn Mandur in Lisaan al Arab, volume 15, pg 402: Maula is guardian who has authority
over people.

." : ":402/15
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=4803&id=9368

Al Raghab al Asfahani in al Mufradaat Fi Alfadh Al Quran, pg 885; There is no difference


between Wilayah and walayah in terms of meaning. The real meaning is Guardian or to
have authority over something. The word wali and mula are used in having authority over
something.

: 425 -

) ( :" ( )

: : " :) 885 ( ."


.) 887 ( .}... >6/<
Al Faraa said in Maani al Quran volume 3, pg 134: Wali & Maula is one in the Arabic
language and weve heard Walaya & Wilaya having the same meanings. (Abu al Abbas
also said something similar)

" ." " :134/3 207 .) ( ..."

http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=4803&id=9368
http://lexicons.sakhr.com/openme.asp?fileurl=/html/2058702.html

10

Ibn al Atheer said in al Nihaia fi Ghareeb al Athar volume 5, pg 228: Whoever have
authority over something, then he is his Maula or his Wali.

)228/5 ( ." " : http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=4817&id=4692

Question 2:
The Prophet was in Mecca for Hajj, however he did not mention anything about Wilayah
of Imam Ali there. He made this statement in Ghadeer Khum, which is in Johfa, 160km
from Mecca. Why did he not say it in Mecca itself if it was so important, where he would
have had a bigger crowd? Most of the people had already gone home after Hajj from
Mecca itself.
Reply:

11

12

First of all, the Prophet mentioned Hadith Thaqalayn during Hajj, which is by itself enough
to prove the Wilayah of Imam Ali. Even if the Ghadeer Khum incident did not take place,
that Hadith is sufficient to prove the position of the Ahlul Bayt and Wilayah of Imam Ali.
Additionally; if you look carefully at the map, you will observe that there are two lines;
green line and a red line. At the bottom of the map is Mecca, if you follow the line right to
the top, then that is Madina. The green line represents the way travelers usually used to
travel from Mecca to Madina. The red line represents the line which Prophet Mohammed
used to travel to Madina when he was hiding from the Kuffar, in the cave. It was not the
usual route. Now observe the position of Mecca. It is in the middle of the mountains.
Sunnis assume that people can go directly to their homes from Mecca. In reality this is not
the case, due to mountainous terrain, they need to travel to Johfa, which is a connection
point. From there they can go their respective ways. This means that most of the people
accompanied the Prophet till Johfa, after which they went their separate ways. Thus he
did not lose most of the people as the Sunnis assume.
Let us say he did lose most of the people. Everybody went home, and only the people of
Madina were left with him or the people who lived around Madina. This is still enough.
Why? Lets read the following verse:

)101 :9 (



[Shakir 9:101] And from among those who are round about you of the dwellers of the desert
there are hypocrites, and from among the people of Medina (also); they are stubborn in
hypocrisy; you do not know them;
[Pickthal 9:101] And among those around you of the wandering Arabs there are hypocrites,
and among the townspeople of Al-Madinah (there are some who) persist in hypocrisy whom thou
(O Muhammad) knowest not.

This proves that the people of Madina and those around needed more attention; they also
had the most influence on Islam and its future. The Prophet wanted to focus on them in
particular, and place extra emphasis on them.
Now there is only one more problem we need to clarify from within this question. Sunnis
will ask why did he not make the extra effort in Mecca itself? Why wait till Johfa?
Reply:
He wanted this EXTREMELY important event to be a memorable one. It is a fact that the
memory recalls those incidents much better which took place around exception
circumstances. The Prophet wanted this event to be memorable, he wanted to embed it
into the minds of the believers so no one can claim later to have forgotten it. This is why
he stopped them all in the middle of the way, in an unusual spot like Johfa and made the
statement.

13

Which piece of news will be more memorable for you? One that was mentioned during the
regular news time? Or one that the TV channel would suddenly cuts its program to
broadcast it? This is why it was chosen for the Prophet to declare the guardianship of
Imam Ali in Johfa and not in Hajj.
Question 3:
The Shia has made a big deal out of something very small. It was a very trivial incident,
which we have blown out of proportion. Prophet Mohammed said this to make peace
among the companions, as some of them were displeased with Imam Ali. That is all. It
was merely a small disagreement that the Prophet wished to sort out and thus made this
statement. Some of the authentic hadiths that they use to support their argument are;
Majma al Zawaid, volume 9, pg 108:
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=1403&id=17820

Also Ahmed al Hanbal narrated it, under hadith # 21883: Prophet sent some people
including Imam Ali to Yemen, to preach Islam. There they were displeased with something
about Imam Ali. When they returned, the Prophet asked them, How was Ali? They told
him regarding what they were displeased about. At this the narrator said that the Prophet
had a red face which showed his anger and replied, Man kunthu waliuh fa Ali un waliuh.
The narrator then said, I will never hate Ali again.

: ( ) 21883
( ) : :
(. : . : : ()
)108/9
Al Nisayi, volume 5, pg 130:
Musnad Ahmed, volume 5, pg 358, hadith # 21950:
http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=21950&doc=6

I had something in my heart against Ali. Me and Khalid ibn Walid were sent to Yemen
with Imam Ali as the leader. We didnt like something about imam ali. When we told the
prophet about it, his face changed and he said, Man kuntu waliuh fa Ali un waliuh
Albani said this hadith is authentic according to musnad, in his book Silsila Sahih, volume
4, pg 337

( ) 21950 358/5 130/5


() :
() : : :
() : : :
. :
:
)337/4 ( .

14

Musnad Ahmed, hadith #19081


http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=19081&doc=6

Tirmidhi, hadith # 3645


http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?hnum=3645&doc=2

Albani said this is authentic in his book Sunan Sahih Tirmidhi, volume 3, pg 521, hadith #
3704: Similar to the previous ahadith, a group of people came to the Prophet and
complained about Imam Ali. The first person said something, prophet kept silent, the
second person went onto say something, he kept silent and so forth till the fourth person
complained. At this the prophet showed an anger he had never shown before and replied,
What do you want from Ali? Ali is from me and I am from Ali. And he is the wali of all the
believers after me.

521/3 ( 3645 19081


() : ) 3712
() : ()
! : ()
) (
! :
. !
. 8474 132/5

http://www.sonnhonline.com/Hadith.aspx?HadithID=269073

Reply:
Those are incidents that have happened in different time, place and has nothing to do with
Ghadeer Khum. Because this incident actually happened before Hajj, where as Ghadeer
Khum happened after Hajj. This happened in Madina, when Ghadeer happened in Johfa.
Our proof for this;
Book of Al Dhahabi, Tareekh al Islam, Chapter of Kitab al Maghazi, pg 690:
(He said: This is an authentic hadith, which al Bukhari narrated some of it)
Khalid ibn Walid and others were sent to Yemen for 6 months to make Dawa. They did
not succeed in making them accept Islam. Prophet then sent imam Ali and ordered him to
tell Khalid and the rest to return back. Back obviously refers to Madina where the Prophet
was. Imam Ali once he reached Yemen made the people all stand in a straight line and
read the Prophets letter to them. At this first attempt, they all accepted Islam. He then sent
a letter telling the Prophet about this (obviously with Khalid ibn Walid and the rest in their
way back as the Prophet had ordered). When the Prophet read this letter the he went into
Sujud and sent Salaam on the tribe of Hamdaan, the tribe which converted

:690
() : :
:

15

( ) ( ) ( ) ()

: ) ( ()
. : .
: . () ...
: - 748 ( ."
.) 1419 1998
http://www.islammessage.com/booksww/book_search_results.php?bkid=4118&id=355

What do we understand from this?


That Imam Ali had sent Khalid ibn Walid and the rest back to Madina with the letter to the
Prophet and then this is where the incident which the Sunnis refer to, took place. This has
no relation to Ghadeer Khum, and it was in Madina before Hajj.
In this hadith the Prophet showed anger, not in the case of Ghadeer.
In this hadith he was replying to the people, in ghadeer he gave a speech.
In this hadith the Prophet spoke to a small group of people, in Ghadeer there was large
crowd.
In this hadith the Prophet used the word Wali, and in Ghadee Khum he used Maula.
Thus the two incidents are not related; they are separate and took place at separate times.
However, we believe that this hadith can also be used to prove the guardianship of Imam
Ali. The reason is the Prophet said Ali is the wali of all believers after me, which proves
that he meant guardianship and not friendship since Quran already proved that to
everybody before and after the Prophet.

)9:71 (

[Pickthal 9:71] And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends one of another

Question 4:
Bring the hadith of Ghadeer Khum through authentic chains, from the Shia books.
Reply:
The Hadith is Mutawater according to Al Iqtisad for Shaykh Al Toosi, pg 216.
http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/eqtesad/a22.html

The Shias also have it with authentic chains, some of which are narrated in:
Al Khisal for Al Shaykh Al Saduq, pg 55.
http://www.u-of-islam.net/uofislam/maktaba/Hadith/Khesal1/a72.htm
http://www.u-of-islam.net/uofislam/maktaba/Hadith/Khesal1/a73.htm
http://www.u-of-islam.net/uofislam/maktaba/Hadith/Khesal1/a74.htm

16

Usul Al Kafi for Al Kulaini, volume 1, pg 286, hadith 1, Chapter of Allah & the Prophets
Appointing on the Imams one by one.
http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/al-kafi-1/128.html

-------------

17

Centres d'intérêt liés