There are twenty groups of people who call themselves Shiis (or Shiites). A few of these groups go to extremes. Some of these eccentric people say that "Allah is inside Ali. Worshipping Ali, therefore, means worshipping Him." A second group, however, castigate this group, saying, "Could Ali ever be Allah? He is human. Yet he is the highest of mankind. Allah sent Qur'an al-karim to him. But Jabrail (The Archangel Gabriel), showing favoritism, brought it (Qur'an al-karim) to Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', instead. So Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' cheated Ali out of his right." There is yet a third group, who reprove this second group and claim, "Could such a thing ever be possible. Our Prophet is Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'. Only, he said that Ali should be the Khalifa after him. Yet the Ashab al-kiram disobeyed this commandment of his and voted the other three into the office of caliphate, leaving Ali the fourth turn." Thus, alleging that the other three Khalifas deprived hadrat Ali of his right, they show hostility against them. They extend this hostility to most of the Ashab al-kiram by asserting that they did not give him his right. Also, they are indignant with Ali 'radi-allahu anh' because, they allege, he did not insist on his due. All these four groups are disbelievers. The remaining groups, on the other hand, are groups of Bidat (Any belief or behavior that did not exist in the time of the Prophet or his four rightly-guided Khalifas and which was fabricated afterwards, is called Bidat.) because they misinterpret the Nass (Ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs with clear meaning are called the Nass.) though they do not deny them. May Allahu ta'ala give them all hidayat (guidance to the right way)! May He bless them with the good luck of coming round to the right course! Amin.

Millions of people living in the villages of Iran, in Iraq and Syria today, have lost their way. Muslims (in these places) are made to read a book titled (Husniyya). The book, which was published in Istanbul as well, is alleged to be a written account of the conversations taking place between a jariya named Husniyya and some other people in the palace of Harun-ur-Rashid. Yet it has been found out that it was prepared in the style of a novel by an enemy of Islam, a Jewish convert named Murtada. Giving the ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs distorted meanings and misrepresenting the facts and events, it assails the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain' and the 'Ulama (scholars, savants) of Ahl as-sunnat 'rahmat-ullahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain', and misdirects the unlearned people by fabricating false sad stories.

The second part of the book (Documents of the Right Word) consists of the comprehensive answers given to Murteda's delusive writings. Here we begin translating the book (Radd-i-Rawafid).

May plentiful, beautiful, fruitful hamd be to Allahu ta'ala in a way He likes, loves best! May benedictions and salutations be over our master, Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', the highest of mankind, the Prophet of all people, whites and blacks alike, in a manner becoming his high honor! May salutations be over Muhammad's 'alaihis-salam' four Khalifas, who followed and guided to the right way, over his children, over his Ahl al- bayt, all of whom were beautiful and pure, and also over his Sahaba, in a manner agreeable with their great positions and high grades!

This poor born servant, (Ahmad, the son of Abd-ul-ahad Faruqi (Hadrat Imam-i-Rabbani means himself.)), who is intensely in need of the mercy of Allah, the sender of all the necessities of every being, the one and only one owner and possessor, and who is the servant of the 'Ulama of Ahl as-sunnat, have seen a booklet recently. This booklet seems to have been written as an answer to the scholars of Mavera-'un-nahr (Transoxiana) during the Shiites' siege of Mesh-hed city. These scholars had written that those who censure the Ashab al-kiram are disbelievers. When I read the booklet, I saw that they are calling the three Khalifas disbelievers and traducing hadrat Aisha-i-Siddiqa (One of the Prophet's blessed wives and, at the same time, hadrat Abu Bakr's daughter.) 'radi-allahu anha' by means of representations believable only to idiots. I have heard that a few piteous people among the learners in our vicinity have been boasting about reading this book and sending copies of it to statesmen and even to sultans. This faqir, (Imam-i-Rabbani means himself) have already been giving logical and scientific answers to those untrue writings, and convincing everybody that those people are wrong and aberrant, in my speeches and lectures [and in most of my letters in (the book) Maktubat]. Yet the Islamic spirit I have had, enhanced by the commandment in the hadith ash-Sharif, "When fitnas (instigations, mischiefs) and bidats appear and my Ashab are vilified, a person who knows the fact should let others know it, too. If he does not, may he be under the curse of Allahu ta'ala and angels and all mankind! Allahu ta'ala will not accept this scholar's worships, neither the fard (compulsory) ones nor the supererogatory ones", stimulated me into feeling discontented with these speeches [and writings] of mine. I could not sprinkle water on the burning of my lungs. I could not help feeling deeply grieved. I humbly thought that, unless their purposes were written, the benefit I have been expecting could not be obtained. Trusting myself to Allahu ta'ala, the only Being to whom everyone in need supplicates, the most generous favorer, and the only protector of man against repulsive, embarrassing things, and relying on His help, I began writing this booklet. Allahu ta'ala is our owner. He, alone, is the helper of everybody. It is with His help that success is attainable. It is by asking Him that guidance to the right way is possible.

[The (celebrated Arabic) dictionary, (Qamus), written by (Mejd-'d-Din) Muhammad bin Yaqub Firu-abadi [729-816 [A.D. 1413], in Yaman], was translated into Turkish by Ahmad Asim Effendi [1235 [A.D. 1820], in Nuh Kuyusu, Uskudar (Scutari, Istanbul)]. It is a very valuable dictionary. It is written as follows in this dictionary: "Shiah or Shii means 'One's supporters, people who make one stronger'. And Rafida or Rafidi means one who forsakes, leaves, deserts. The Rafidis said Zayd bin Zaynalabidin Ali was the imam. They told Zayd to be hostile to Abu Bakr and 'Umar. He answered that he could not be hostile to the good people loved by his great grandfather, Rasulullah. Upon this, they abandoned Zayd. Therefore they were called Rafidi." (Also see TURKISH AND ENGLISH LEXICON, by Sir James W. Redhouse, 1974, Librairie du Liban, p. 957.) Rafidis say that they love Ali 'radi-allahu anh', and that for loving him it is necessary to be hostile to all or some of the Ashab al-kiram. Fortunately, the educated Iranian Shiis, who are mostly scientists, are not so. As for the word Alawi (or Alevi), it has been used in three different meanings:

1- Hadrat Ali's 'radi-allahu anh' offspring living in every century has been called Alawi. In books written in the early ages (of Islam) the children of hadrat Hasan and Husain, (the two sons of hadrat Ali), are mentioned as Alawis. Later, hadrat Hasan's offspring were and has been called Sharif, and hadrat Husain's offspring, Sayyid 'radi-allahu anhuma'.

2- People who love hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' and who learn his way well and correctly and follow it because it is the way guided by Muhammad 'alaihis- salam', should be called (Alawi). Those who adhere to this right way will love all the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain'. This is the way followed by the Ahl as- Sunnat (the Sunni, or Sunnite, Muslims). This means to say that the right of being Alawi belongs to the Ahl as-sunnat.

3- The enemies of Islam have today been calling themselves (Alawi) in order to deceive the pure Muslim Alawis in Turkey. They have been using this beautiful name as a mask].

It is written in the aforenamed book that, "After our Prophet's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' honoring the Hereafter with his presence, the leader, the imam of Muslims is Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. Succession to this presidency in every century rightfully belongs to his offspring alone. No one else can ever be Muslims' imam [president] in any time. It is only wrongfully, by oppression or coercion that others could obtain this presidency, in which case there could be nothing for these people (hadrat Ali's descendants) to do to prevent it." Various groups of Shiis have appeared in the course of time, yet their main groups are twenty. Before beginning our principal subject, we shall mention a few of their notorious groups and explain their beliefs and aims. Thus everybody will learn about the inner essence of the matter, and right and wrong will be distinguished clearly from each other:

Ahmad Faruqi states: The first person to curse the Ashab al-kiram was Abdullah bin Seba'.

[It is stated in the dictionary named Munjid and in Qamus ul-alam that, "This convert, who is said to have been a Jew, instigated an insurrection in Egypt, whereupon the marauders roaming around (came and) martyred hadrat 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh'."]

Ali 'radi-allahu anh' exiled him (Abdullah bin Seba') to Medayn city. He (Abdullah bin Seba') used to say, "Ibni Muljam did not kill hadrat Ali. The Satan had disguised himself into Ali. So he (Ibni Muljam) killed the Satan. Ali is among clouds. Thunder is his voice. And thunderbolt is his whip." The Seb'iyya, people who have been misled by this Jew named Abdullah Seba', say, "O thou Amir al-Muminin! May salutations be on you," when they hear thunder.

[In the city of Esterabad in Iran a heretic named Fadlullah inserted many superstitions and lies into Seba'ism and named it Hurufi sect. He was killed in 796 [A.D. 1393]. Hurufis have merged into Shiites, though they have nothing to do with Shiism].

The Kamiliyya group, vituperate the Ashab al-kiram. They call the Ashab al-kiram disbelievers because they did not make hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' the (first) imam. They say that Ali 'radi-allahu anh' was a disbeliever because he did not insist on his due. They believe in metempsychosis. [There is detailed information about Metempsychosis in the (Turkish) book Se'adet-i- Ebediyye (The book Se'adet-i-Ebediyye has been partly translated into English and published in fascicles titled Endless Bliss.)].

The Benaniyya group, are the followers of Benan bin Jem'an. They say, "Our God is in human form. In the course of time he has perished. Only his face has remained. His soul was in Ali. Then it transmigrated into his (Ali's) son, Muhammad bin Hanafiyya, and from him into his son Abu Hashim. Now it is in Benan."

The Jenahiyya group. Their leader is Abdullah bin Muawiya. They believe in metempsychosis, that is, transmigration of souls from one body to another. They say, "God's soul went into Adam 'alaihis-salam' first, and then into Sheest 'alaihis-salam.' Thus, transmigrating from one Prophet to another, it finally entered Ali and his children. It is in Abdullah now." They do not believe in rising after death. They say halal about many things that are haram, such as drinking wine, eating lesh (meat from an animal that has died by itself or which has been killed in a manner not prescribed by Islam), committing fornication.

The Mansuriyya group are the followers of Abu Mansur Ajlim. He was one of the disciples of Imam-i-Muhammad Baqir 'radi-allahu anh'. When this Imam dismissed him, he declared his religious leadership. These people (the Mansuriyya group) say, "Abu Mansur ascended to heaven. Allahu ta'ala rubbed His hand gently on his head and said: O my son! Go and announce my commandments to my born servants!" According to these people, "The word 'kisfan' in the forty-fourth ayat of the Tur sura in Qur'an al-karim implies Abu Mansur. (The chain of) prophethood has not come to an end yet. There are Prophets to come. Jannat (Paradise) means the imam (religious leader) we are to love. And Jahannam (Hell) signifies people we must hate, e.g. Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum'. Fard (overt commandments of Islam) are people we should love. And harams (Islam's overt prohibitions) are people we are to hate."

The Hattabiyya group are the followers of Hattab-i-Esedee. He was one of the disciples of Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq 'rahmat- ullahi alaih'. Offended by this person's insolent behaviors, Imam (Jafar Sadiq) dismissed him. Yet, after this Imam's death, he claimed to be the new imam. According to his followers, "Imams are Prophets. In fact, they are Allah's sons. Jafar Sadiq is a god. Yet Abul-hattab (Esedee) is superior to him and also to Ali." They say, "It is halal (permissible) to bear false witness in order to protect the friends against the enemies. Jannat (Paradise) signifies leading a good and comfortable life in this world. And Jahannam (Hell) means worldly troubles and cares. There is neither a beginning nor an end of this world. There is no Doomsday. Has anyone seen Paradise or Hell? Is there anyone to say he has been to either one of these places?" They therefore commit harams and disignore the fard.

The Ghurabiyya group. They say, "Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' resembled Ali very much. The similarity between them was much more exact than that which is between two crows or two flies. Allahu ta'ala had ordered Jabrail (Gabriel) to take the Qur'an al-karim to Ali. Confused by this exact similitude, Gabriel revealed the Qur'an al-karim to Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'." For this reason they curse Jabrail 'alaihis- salam'.

The Dhammiyya group, vituperate Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'. They say, "Ali is the God. He appointed Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' the Prophet. Yet Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' attached people to himself instead of (to) Ali." Another group of them say that Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' is the God. That is, some of them hold Muhammad 'alaihis-salam' higher, whereas others consider Ali 'radi-allahu anh' higher. There is yet another group who maintain the belief that "Muhammad, Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain, who are in one ahl-i- aba [overcoat], make up a unity. The same one spirit has entered all these five people at the same time. They have no superiority over one another. Fatima, too, is male."

The Yunusiyya group, are the followers of Yunus bin Abd-ur-rahman. They say, "Allah is sitting on the Arsh. Angels mounted Him on to the Arsh, yet He is more powerful than angels. This is like the case with an ibis, who is bigger and stronger than its legs though it walks on its legs."

The Mufavvida group. They say that "Allahu ta'ala created the world and then committed all the worldly matters to the charge of Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'." According to others, "He (Allahu ta'ala) committed the worldly matters to Ali. And Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah' is creating whatever he wishes."

The Ismailiyya group, says that Qur'an al-karim has a batin [invisible inner essence] as well as a zahir [outward appearance]. The zahir, when compared to the batin, is like the shell of a hazel-nut in comparison to its kernel. Whatever a person would obtain by enduring the difficulty and trouble of obeying the commandments and prohibitions, which make up the zahir, is easily attainable by adapting oneself to the batin. So, one does not have to go into trouble by worshipping." For making people believe these statements of theirs, they quote the thirteenth ayat of Hadid sura, which points out the wall between the people who are in Paradise and those who are in Hell. They say, "There is no haram (prohibition). Everything is halal (permitted). There are seven Prophets in possession of a religion. They are Adam, Nuh (Noah), Ibrahim, Isa, Musa, Muhammad 'alaihimus-salam', and Muhammad Mahdi, who is to emerge in the future." Their purpose is to demolish the religion. By asking deceptive questions on religious matters, they try to instil doubts into Muslims. Examples of these questions, which are intended to shock the iman in young people, are: "Why is it that a menstruating woman has to perform her duties of fasting later which she has not been able to do (because of her menstruation), and does not have to perform the daily prayers of namaz which she has missed (for the same reason)? Emission of semen necessitates ghusl (ritual washing of the whole body) but urination does not (necessitate ghusl), though urine is dirtier than semen; why? Why do some prayers of namaz that are fard have four rakats, while others have three to two rakats?" [Indeed, the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat have already given the answers of such questions, and explained the reasons, in their books]. They fabricate meanings for the commandments of Allahu ta'ala. For instance, they say, "Making ablution means loving the Imam. And performing the namaz means the Prophet. For the forty-fifth ayat of the Ankebut sura of Qur'an al- karim purports, 'Namaz will prevent man from evil, wicked things.' This ayat al-karima signifies the Prophet. Becoming junub (canonical uncleanness) means letting others know about things one has to keep to oneself. And ghusl (washing in order to become canonically clean) means to promise again. Zakat (Certain amount of property which people who are rich according to Islam have to give yearly to people whom Islam accepts as poor. Zakat is one of the five commandments of Islam. There is detailed information about zakat in the (Turkish) book Se'adet-i-Ebediyye.) means cleaning one's nafs by learning religious knowledge. Kaba means the Prophet; the door of Kaba means Ali; the hill of Safa means Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'; the hill of Merva means Ali, the seven tawafs (circumambulations) means loving the seven imams. Jannat (Paradise) means escaping the trouble of worships, and Jahannam (Hell) means the torture and agony of avoiding the haram." A few of their other illogical and irreligious absurdities are their statements, such as, "Allah is neither existent nor nonexistent, neither learned nor ignorant, neither powerful nor incapable."

Hasan bin Muhammad Sabbah, a schoolfellow of Nizam-ul-mulk and the (well-known) poet 'Umar Hayyam, founded the Ismailiyya State in Rey city in 473 [A.D. 1081], declared himself the time's imam (religious leader), and coerced the Sunnite Muslims into his sect. He and, after his death in 518, his successors until the termination of his State in 654 [A.D. 1255], perpetrated a great deal of persecution and cruelty in order to establish their beliefs and revolutions. The earnest and truthful scholars of Ahl as-sunnat rotted in dungeons and were martyred. According to these eccentric people, there has to be an imam in every age. They prohibit ignorant people from reading books and learned people from reading old books. This is intended to cover their wickedness, to conceal the fact that they are in the wrong way. They are fond of the ancient Greek philosophy. They mock religious teachings. [Another name of this group is Qaramita. For a man named Hamdan Qurmut, from a village called Vasit in the neighborhood of Baghdad, founded the Qaramita State in 278 [A.D. 891], subjected the Sunnite Muslims to very harsh torments and forced them to join the Ismailiyya group. This group settled in Nejd. Abu Tahir, who became their leader in 317 [A.D. 929], invaded Mecca and slaughtered thousands of hajjis. He ransacked the treasury department and (most) homes. His men hoisted off the (sacred stone called) Hajar-i-eswed from its original place and carried it to Hejr city, their capital in the vicinity of Basra. This blessed stone was retained by the Qaramitis for twenty-two years. Their State collapsed in 328, an event that succored Muslims from a grave nuisance].

The Zaydiyya group are attached to Zayd bin Ali Zaynalabidin. [Zaynalabidin Ali bin Husain is the fourth one of the twelve imams. He was twelve years old when he survived the catastrophe of Karbala. He passed away in Medina (46-94 [A.D. 713)]. His grave is beside that of his (paternal) uncle, Imam-i-Hasan 'radi-allahu anhum']. The Zaydiyya group have been divided into three groups: The group called Jarudiyya claim that "Caliphate was Ali's right. The Ashab became disbelievers by not giving him his due." The second group, Sulaimaniyya, believe that Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhum' are rightful Khalifas. They say that, "the Ashab al-kiram made a mistake by making them Khalifas instead of Ali. This mistake of theirs, however, is not a sin or wrongdoing. 'Uthman, Talha, Zubair, and Aisha 'radi-allahu anhum' became disbelievers." The third group is Tabiriyya. They are identical with the Sulaimaniyya. The only difference is that this group do not revile 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh'. Most Zaydis of our time are in one of these three groups; their belief system conforms with that of the Mu'tezila group, and their ways of worship are identical with those of the Muslims of Hanafi Madhhab.

The Imamiyya group, say that "It had been commanded plainly that Ali 'radi-allahu anh' was to be the (first) Khalifa. The Ashab became disbelievers by not carrying out this commandment. It is an absolute fact that caliphate reached Imam-i-Jafar Sadiq through a paternal chain. It is not certain who succeeded him in caliphate." According to most of them, after Jafar Sadiq the seventh imam was his son, Musa Kazim [129-186 (C.E. 799), buried in the district called Kazimiyya in Baghdad]; then his son, Ali Rida [148-203, buried in the city of Mesh-hed, alias Tus, in eastern Iran]; then his son Muhammad Takee [194-220, in Kazimiyya]; then Abulhasen Ali bin Muhammad Hadi Nakee [213-254 in the district called Asker in Sermen Rey city]; then, the eleventh imam, Hasan bin Ali Askari [232-261 (C.E. 875), buried beside his father, in Baghdad]; and then, the twelfth and last imam, Muhammad bin Hasan Mahdi; [he was born in 255, and when he was ten, or seventeen, years old, he went into a cave in his home and did not come back out again]. They believe that he is at the same time the person who is named Mahdi and who will emerge towards the end of the world.

There are other groups, who are more or less similar to these groups. All of them have deviated from the right way; changing with time, some of them have come nearer the right course, while others have gone altogether beyond measure.

[In today's Iran, all these aberrant groups exist among the illiterate people. Nevertheless, it is observed with gratitude that the educated ones have been reading true books and day by day getting closer to the right word of the Ahl as-sunnat. For instance, it is stated as follows in the dictionary of Doctor Muhammad Muqremi, which was printed in Tehran in the solar Hijri year 1333 [C.E. 1954]: "The Khulafa-i-rashidin: Abu Bakr and 'Umar and 'Uthman 'radi- allahu anhum', and Ali 'karram-allahu wajhah'."]

Upon reading the lines above, a person who is reasonable enough to tell good from bad, will realize at once without seeking another evidence how false and how wrong these groups, who have merged among the Shiis, are. It is obvious that their beliefs are thoroughly unfounded, irreligious, and illusory. It is a subject vulnerable to derision, for people who hold these beliefs, to claim that they love the Ahl al-bayt of our master the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' or the twelve imams. No, they could not be sincere. For those great people, (the Ahl al-bayt and the twelve imams), do not want inordinate, excessive love, and they hate being followed in words only. The Hurufis' saying that they love the Ahl al-bayt is like Christians' claiming that they love Isa (Jesus) 'alaihis-salam'. Loving him excessively, they make a god of him and worship him. However, Isa 'alaihis- salam' does not want this kind of love. As a matter of fact, Ali 'radi-allahu anh' stated that Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had said to him: "O Ali! The case with you is like the case with Isa 'alaihis-salam'. Jewry became hostile to him. They spread a very offensive slander about his mother. Christians, on the other hand, loved him too much. They exalted him to a rank that would have been impossible for him to occupy."

Now, trusting ourselves to the help of Allahu ta'ala, the great owner and ruler of mankind, we will answer the addle protests in that booklet. Allahu ta'ala is powerful enough to do everything, and He never turns down those who ask for His help.

1- The scholars of Mavera'un nehr [May Allahu ta'ala give them plenty of reward for their toils. The vast extent of land lying between the rivers Seyhun (Jaxartes) and Jeyhun (Oxus), which flow into Aral Sea, is called Mavera'un nehr (Transoxiana)] state that:

"Our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' highly valued the three Khalifas and loved them very much. There are many sahih hadiths praising each of them. Every statement he made was a piece of wahy [a revelation made by Jabrail 'alaihis-salam']. As a matter of fact, the third ayat of Wan-najmi sura purports: 'He never makes idle talks. He merely says whatever is (revealed through) wahy to him.' A person who reviles these three Khalifas will have opposed the wahy. And opposing the wahy, in its turn, is disbelief."

The booklet gives the following answer to these writings: These reasons you have cited signify that the three Khalifas are to be cursed, not that they should be loved. They show that they became Khalifas unjustly. For Ali bin Muhammad Amidi [born in Amid town in Diyar Bakr in 551 and passed away in Baghdad in 631 (C.E. 1234)], a great Sunni scholar, says in his book Sharh-i-Mawaqif that some disagreements arose among Muslims towards the death of our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. The first disagreement was when the Messenger 'alaihis-salam' stated, "Fetch me (some) paper. I shall write a few things so that you should not deviate from the right way after me." 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' did not like this order. This person became pained all over. He said, "The Book of Allahu ta'ala is sufficient for us." The Ashab could not come to an agreement. Voices were raised. This situation hurt the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', and he said, "Go! It is not nice to make noise in my presence."

The second disagreement occurred as follows: After the disagreement on (the Prophet's) asking for paper, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' ordered that an army under Usama's command should set out for jihad (holy war). Some of them were reluctant to go. When they stated disinclination of theirs, the Prophet repeated his order more emphatically, saying, "Let Usama's army be prepared! May Allah curse those who do not join this army!" The same people were still unwilling; and they disobeyed this order. According to the aforementioned ayat al-karima, his asking for paper in order to make a written will was by wahy. By preventing this, 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' refused the wahy. And refusing the wahy, in its turn, is disbelief, as you have stated. Furthermore, the forty-seventh, forty-eighth, and fiftieth ayats of Maida sura purport, "Those who do not judge compatibly with the rules and commandments revealed by Allahu ta'ala, are disbelievers." And a disbeliever in turn cannot be the Prophet's representative, i.e. the Khalifa. By the same token, a person who did not join Usama's army must have become a disbeliever. None of the three Khalifas joined the army. You say that everything Rasulullah did was by wahy. The same rule applies to this instance. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had deported Marwan out of Medina. This, too, was by wahy. [Marwan bin Hakem bin Ebil 'as bin Umayya was born in the second year of the Hijrat (Hegira). He was 'Uthman's 'radi-allahu anh' paternal first cousin. He passed away in 65, during his caliphate]. The Khalifa 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' invited him back to Medina, employed him as a secretary in the office of caliphate, thus prizing him; this is disbelief. And it is disbelief for two different reasons. The first reason is that which you have stated. The second reason is the twenty-second ayat of Mujadala sura, which purports, "People who have iman (belief) in Allahu ta'ala and on the Judgement Day, would not love the enemies of Allahu ta'ala and His Messenger, even though they were their brothers, (sisters), or relatives."

With the help of Allahu ta'ala, here is our answer to this booklet: Not everything Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said or did was by wahy. The author of the booklet erroneously introduces this ayat al-karima as an evidence. For the ayat informs that Qur'an al-karim is wahy. Baidawi [Abdullah bin 'Umar; passed away in Tabriz in 691 (C.E. 1291)], the paramount guide of Mufassirs (Scholars dealing with the meanings of ayat al-karimas), explains this ayat as follows: "Whatever he says of Qur'an al-karim is not of himself. It is by wahy." If all his words and actions had been by wahy, Allahu ta'ala would never have contradicted or reproved him. For instance, the first ayat of Tahrim sura purports, "O my Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'! Why are you prohibiting yourself from something which Allahu ta'ala has made halal for you?" The forty-fourth ayat of Tawba sura purports, "Why did you give them the permission? Allahu ta'ala has forgiven you this deed of yours." The sixty-seventh ayat of Anfal sura purports, "It would not be worthy of any Prophet to set free in return for property the captives in war. Killing most of them on the earth will cause them to become weaker. You are after worldly property. Yet Allahu ta'ala wishes you to earn thawab and attain Paradise and (its) blessings." Rasulullah 'sall-allahu wa sallam' was about to conduct the namaz of janaza ( When a Muslim dies, other Muslims come together and perform a certain prayer of namaz, which is called namaz of janaza.) for a (dead) munafiq (A person who disbelieves ayats of Qur'an al-karim and conceals his disbelief is called a munafiq. He is the basest type of unbeliever.), when the eighty-fifth ayat of Tawba sura was revealed, which purports, "Do not perform namaz for any of those disbelievers who are dead eternally!" Qur'an al-karim contains many such ayat al-karimas. This means to say that some of his words and actions reflected his personal choice and ijtihad. The tafsir of Baidawi provides the following explanation on the ayat al-karima concerning the setting free of the slaves: "This ayat al-karima shows that Prophets make ijtihad, and their ijtihad may be wrong. However, it shows at the same time that they are instantaneously informed that they are wrong, and their error is corrected."

In worldly matters pertaining to mentality, it is permissible for the Ashab al-kiram to disagree with Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. Sometimes the wahy that was revealed tallied with the inference of the Ashab. For instance, in the question of how the captives in (the holy war of) Badr should be treated, hadrat 'Umar's 'radi-allahu anh' ijtihad did not conform with Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' ijtihad. The wahy (the ayat al-karima that was revealed to inform with the divine decree) commanded that hadrat 'Umar's ijtihad should be executed. For Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' would not busy his blessed heart with matters that could be solved with mind. Baidawi states, "Seventy slaves were captured in the holy war of Badr. Among them were Rasulullah's paternal uncle Abbas, and Ali's elder brother Uqayl, [who became a Muslim in the second year of the Hijrat]. He consulted with his Ashab (Companions) about what they should do with the captives. Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' said, 'These people are your fellow citizens and relatives. Do not inflict punishment on them! Perhaps, Allahu ta'ala will grant them the lucky chance to repent (for having been disbelievers). Set them free in return for money. This will add to the (financial) power your Ashab has.' 'Umar, on the other hand, said, 'These people are the leaders of Islam's enemies. Allahu ta'ala has not put us in a situation to need their money. They came here to kill you and us. Order me and I shall kill so and so. Order Ali and Hamza and they will kill their own brothers.' Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, 'Allahu ta'ala creates some hearts soft. So much so that they are softer than milk. And He creates some hearts hard, so that they are harder than stone. O Abu Bakr! You are like Ibrahim 'alaihis- salam'. He would say: He who goes by my side will be with me. And he who does not follow me; Allahu ta'ala is ghafur (all-forgiving) and rahim (compassionate)... O 'Umar! You are like Nuh (Noah) 'alaihis-salam'. He said: Ya Rabbi (O my Allah)! Do not leave any disbeliever on the earth!' Most of the Ashab al-kiram were of the opinion that they should be set free in return for property. They set the slaves free. Upon this the ayat al-karima cited above was revealed. When 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' visited Rasulullah, he saw him and Abu Bakr weeping together. He said, 'O the Messenger of Allah! Why are you (two) weeping? Tell me, so that I shall weep with you.' He (the Prophet) said, 'I am weeping for my Ashab. I have been shown the torment that was to befall them on account of their having set the slaves free in return for property. It (the torment) was closer than that tree,' and he pointed to a tree opposite them." Baidawi goes on as follows: Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "If the torment had not been turned back, no one except 'Umar and Sad bin Muaz would have escaped it." For Sad had agreed with 'Umar and said that the slaves should be killed. 'Radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'. [Sad belonged to the Evs (or Aws) tribe and came to iman (became a Muslim) one year before the Hijrat). He also brought the people under his command to iman (caused them to become Muslims). He joined the ghazas (holy wars), and died of the wound he had received in (the holy war of) Handak (Trench). Rasulullah conducted the namaz of janaza for him and wept bitterly].

Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' asking for paper or ordering the preparation of an army under Usama's command or deporting Marwan out of Medina may not have been by wahy. Each of these decisions was out of his own thought and ijtihad. Those who did not carry out these (orders) cannot be called disbelievers. For we know other examples as well in which the Ashab al-kiram did not agree (with Rasulullah). We have already cited one of them above. At that time the wahy would be revealed and right and wrong would be distinguished from each other; those who disobeyed such commandments would not be blamed or reproached. Otherwise, if there had been the slightest disrespect towards Rasulullah, Allahu ta'ala would have immediately cautioned and dissuaded from it, warning that such acts would incur punishment. An example of this is the command in the second ayat of Hujurat sura, which purports, "O those who have had the honor of having iman! Do not raise thine voice louder than the voice of the Messenger of Allah. Do not call to him as you shout at one another! If a person shows disrespect to him, his worships will become null and void." Sayyid Sharif Ali bin Muhammad Jurjani [740-816 (C.E. 1413)], who has explained the book Mawaqif, quotes Amidi as having said, "All the Ashab al-kiram, with the exception of munafiqs, that is, those who concealed the impiousness of their hearts and pretended to believe, were in unity on the day when Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away. Later on, there were some differences in their ijtihads. These differences were not in principles of belief. None of them became a disbeliever on account of these differences. All such differences were based on the intention of upholding Islam and maintaining its correctitude. For instance, Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' asking for paper brought about (the first) difference. Then another difference of ijtihad occurred in the matter of preparing an army for Usama, whereby some of the Ashab al-kiram said that Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' order should be executed, while others, seeing that his illness was getting worse, were of the opinion that they should wait instead of wearying him." If a person asserted something impossible, e.g. if he said, "Every ijtihad of Rasulullah's was by wahy. Therefore, all his words and behaviors were by wahy," we would answer him as follows: His words and behaviors that were not based on ijtihad were by wahy. Examples of these are the hadith ash-Sharifs praising the three Khalifas. These (hadith ash-Sharifs) gave information about the unknown, which is possible only by wahy. He could not have said them out of ijtihad. The fifty-ninth ayat al-karima of En'am sura purports, "Allahu ta'ala, alone, knows the ghayb, [that is, things that are not known mentally, found out by calculation, or taught by Islam]. No one except Him knows them." And the twenty-sixth ayat of Jinn sura purports, "He, alone, knows secrets. Of the secret things He knows, He intimates the ones He chooses only to the one He likes (best) of Prophets, [that is, to Muhammad 'alaihis-salam']." The ayat al-karima that purports, "He does not talk from himself," signifies the Qur'an al-karim and the (pieces of) wahy revealed to him. Certainly, it would be kufr (disbelief) to deny such words and behaviors of his. There are many other hadiths explaining that the hadith ash-Sharifs praising the three Khalifas 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum' were revealed through wahy by Allahu ta'ala. So many (scholars) narrated these hadith ash-Sharifs that they have become mesh-hur, and even mutawatir (Kinds of hadith ash-Sharifs are explained in detail in the (Turkish) book Se'adet-i-Ebediyye.), hadiths. We will quote some of them:

I. He stated to Abu Bakr: "You are my companion in the cave. You are my companion by the Kawthar (Kevser) Pond (in Paradise)." (Tirmuzi).

II. "Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' came to me. He held me by the hand. He showed me one of my ummat entering through the gate of Paradise." Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' said, "O Rasulullah! I want to be with you there." He (Rasulullah) stated, "O Abu Bakr! Among my Ummat, you will be the first to enter Paradise." (Tirmuzi).

III. When he (the Prophet) stated, "I entered Paradise. I saw a villa. I saw a houri [maiden of Paradise] in it. I asked her: Who are you for? She said: I have been created for 'Umar ibni Hattab. I wanted to go in and see her. But, O 'Umar, I thought it might hurt you!", 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' said, "I would sacrifice my mother, my father, and everything I have for your sake, O Rasulullah!" (Bukhari and Muslim).

IV. He (Rasulullah) pointed to 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' and said, "This (high) person's rank in Paradise is higher than that of any of the rest of my Ummat." (Ibni Maja).

V. "I have not brought Abu Bakr and 'Umar (into a position) ahead of you all. Allahu ta'ala has brought them ahead of you all." (Abu Yala).

VI. "I asked Jabrail 'alaihis-salam' about the virtues of 'Umar. Were I to tell about the values he has as long as the period of Nuh's 'alaihis-salam' prophethood [nine hundred and fifty years], I still would not be able to finish. All the values 'Umar has, on the other hand, are (equal to) only one of Abu Bakr's values." (Abu Yala).

VII. "In Paradise, after Prophets 'alaihimus-salam', the highest ones of all mankind are Abu Bakr and 'Umar." (Tirmuzi and Ibni Maja).

VIII. Abu Musa-l-Ashari narrates: We were sitting in the yard (of a house) in Medina, when someone knocked on the door. The Messenger of Allah ordered, "Open the door and give the visitor the good news that he shall go to Paradise!" When I opened the door, Abu Bakr Siddiq came in. I gave him the good news. He made hamd, (that is, he thanked, praised and lauded Allahu ta'ala. The Arabic word is "Al-hamd-u-lillah", which means, "May thanks, praise and laud be to Allahu ta'ala.") Then there was another knock on the door. "Open the door and give the good news!", said the Prophet again. I opened it, and 'Umar Faruq came in. When I gave him the good news, he made hamd to Allahu ta'ala. The door was knocked once more. The Messenger of Allah said, "Open it and give him the good news and tell him that he will suffer a catastrophe!" I opened (the door). It was 'Uthman Zinnureyn 'radi-allahu anh'. I gave him the good news, and he made hamd. (Bukhari and Muslim).

Supposing we were to acknowledge that Marwan's deportation from Medina had been by wahy, this would not mean a lifelong deportation. Why should it not be possible that he might have been deported for a certain period of time? 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' knew the duration of deportation, and took him back to Medina when the time was over.

The ayat al-karima that purports, "A person with iman will not love the enemies of Allahu ta'ala and His Messenger," prohibits from loving disbelievers. Marwan was not a disbeliever; why should it be forbidden to love him.

It is stated as follows in the booklet: "The hadiths praising the three Khalifas do not exist in our books. On the other hand, the hadiths about (Rasulullah's asking for) paper and (his order for preparation of) Usama's army, which reprove the three Khalifas, are recorded in your books, too. Furthermore, some of the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat have said that it would be permissible to call a useful statement a hadith. Therefore, hadiths that do not exist in the Shiite books are not dependable."

With the help of Allahu ta'ala, we give the following answer: Those who are too excessive in injustice, malign the three Khalifas. So much so that they call them disbelievers. They consider that saying so is Islam and worship. Consequently, they do not believe the sahih hadiths praising the three Khalifas. They discard or change these hadiths. They even interpolate and slander Qur'an al-karim, which is Islam's basic document and which has been authenticated by all people throughout centuries and remained intact until the present time, and make changes in ayat al-karimas. For instance, they have defiled the twenty- sixth ayat of Qiyamat sura, which reads, "Alaina jam'a hu wa Qur- 'ana," and changed it to, "Aliyan jamaat Qur'ana," which means, "Ali compiled the Qur'an." Mad with inordinate bigotry, they attempt to allege that 'Uthman 'radi-allahu anh' expunged the ayats praising the Ahl al-bayt from Qur'an al-karim. As we have explained above, in our discourse on their various groups, some of their groups say that it is permissible to bear false witness when and where it is considered useful. For this reason, any term of reproach would fall short of giving them their deserts. It would be sheer credulity to take them on trust, or to think they are right. Their books cannot be trusted. They are like the changed, defiled copies of the Torah and the Bible. The books of the Ahl as-sunnat, on the other hand, are as secure as steel. For instance, Bukhari is the second most correct book after Qur'an al- karim. There are many hadith ash-Sharifs praising the three Khalifas in this book, as well as in the book Muslim and many other valuable books. These books do not contain any statement vilifying or reproving the three Khalifas. Inferring such meanings as belittle the three Khalifas from ayat al-karimas and hadith ash-Sharifs is a sign of malevolence. What they infer is wrong, and what they suppose is out of place and illusory. This misconception of theirs is like the case with a person with deranged bile; this person will not enjoy the real taste of sugar because something sweet will taste bitter to him. Allahu ta'ala defines these people as follows in the seventh ayat of 'Imran sura, which purports: "People with deranged hearts, in order to cover the truth and instigate mischief, will infer wrong meanings from Qur'an al-karim, thus deviating into aberration." Among the Ahl as- sunnat people, there have been those saying that it would be permissible to call a useful statement a hadith; yet the scholars of Hadith have rejected this and explained in their books that such hadiths are false and slanderous. No one has valued them or adhered to them as hadiths. Therefore, it is an altogether irrelevant and nonsensical argumentation to introduce the so-called statement as an evidence. It is out of place also to say, "It is not disbelief not to obey a hadith reported by only one person. For some of the mujtahids of Ahl as-sunnat have not obeyed such hadiths." A few of the hadith ash-Sharifs praising and exalting the three Khalifas were reported by one Sahabi, yet they have been narrated through various ways by many people and they have thus reached the degree of tawatur. It is certainly disbelief to deny them. None of the mujtahids has disobeyed such hadiths. In fact, Imam Azam Abu Hanifa 'radi-allahu anh', who is the leader of the Ahl as-sunnat, would hold a hadith ash-Sharif reported by one person, and even the statements of the Ashab al-kiram, higher than his own inferences (from Qur'an al-karim), and would say that it would not be permissible to disregard them.

Seeing that there are many hadiths praising the three Khalifas, and thus realizing that they will not be able to withstand them, they take another turn and say, "The three Khalifas were praised, but that was before their unbecoming deeds were seen. Such praises do not necessarily show that they would remain pious believers till death. For it would have been unfair to blame a malefactor before he had committed the malefaction. By the same token, the Amir-ul-Muminin Ali 'radi-allahu anh' knew that Ibni Muljam ( Person who martyred hadrat Ali.) would commit a murder. Yet he did not punish him before he committed the murder." However, various hadith ash-Sharifs declare clearly that the three Khalifas 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum' would remain good and virtuous till death and they would pass away as believers. We have already quoted a few of them. Sahih (authenticated) books contain many other such hadith ash-Sharifs. We agree that a person will not be punished for some guilt he has not committed yet, even if it is known that he will commit that guilt. Nor would it have been correct, however, to praise a person if it had been known that he would turn out to be a wicked person, a person who would deserve punishment. Then, a person praised through hadith ash-Sharif must always be good and virtuous, earlier and later alike. Likewise, the Amir 'radi-allahu anh' did not punish Ibni Muljam, yet he did not praise him, either. He neither castigated nor valued him. We shall expand this answer of ours in the explanation of the eighteenth ayat of Fat-h sura.

2- The 'Ulama (savants, scholars) of Mawara'un-nehr 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' state that: The three Khalifas were among the people honored with the eighteenth ayat of Fat-h sura, which purports, "Allahu ta'ala has been pleased with those who extended their hands to you and promised you under the tree. He loves them all." It is therefore disbelief to vilify or curse them.

The enemies of the Ashab al-kiram answer this as follows: "This ayat al-karima shows that Allahu ta'ala loves the promises, not the people who promised. We all believe this. All these three people did a couple of good deeds. We say that they did bad deeds, too. These malefactions of theirs nullified their promises. For instance, although the Prophet 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' commanded plainly that Ali 'radi-allahu anh' should be the (first) Khalifa, they disobeyed this command and forced their way into the office of caliphate. As it is narrated in Bukhari, they offended Fatima 'radi-allahu anha'. It is declared as follows in a hadith ash-Sharif, which the book Mishkat quotes in its chapter about Fatimat-uz- Zahra: 'He who hurts her will have hurt me. And he who hurts me will have hurt Allahu ta'ala.' The fifty-seventh ayat of Ahzab sura purports, 'May those who torment Allahu ta'ala and His Messenger be accursed both in this world and in the Hereafter!' On account of these malefactions, plus their disobeying the Prophet's commands, such as when he asked for paper and when he ordered to prepare an army for Usama, all the three of them must be cursed and reproved. Taking the last breath in iman (dying as a believer) depends on doing good deeds, and first of all, obeying the Messenger of Allah, at the end of one's life."

Here's our answer: When Allahu ta'ala was pleased with the people who made a promise under the tree, He knew (what was in) their hearts, their intentions. He infused firmness and serenity into their hearts. The final part of the ayat al-karima points out this fact. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' gave the good news that the three Khalifas would go to Paradise. He declared plainly that they would pass away in iman (die as believers). He informed that they would abide by their promises, that they would not renege on their promises. If we admit that Allahu ta'ala stated that He liked their promises and not their persons, (we will have to admit also the fact that), when Allahu ta'ala likes their promises they must pass away in iman. For Allahu ta'ala will not like any deeds of disbelievers. Supposing a group of people were doomed to die as unbelievers, Allahu ta'ala would not be pleased with any of their good deed, however pleasing, charitable and pious their deeds might seem to be. Their good deeds are depicted as follows in the thirty-ninth ayat of Nur sura, which purports, "The deeds performed by disbelievers are like a mirage perceived in a desert. Thirsty people will fancy it to be water when they see it from the distance. When they go near it, they will not find anything. They will realize their disillusionment." Also, the fifty-seventh ayat of Maida sura purports, "If one of you parts with iman and dies as a disbeliever, all the good deeds he has performed shall perish. They will do him no good, neither in the world, nor in the Hereafter." To say that a deed that would do no good in the Hereafter might please Allahu ta'ala, would be an inane assertion. To be pleased with something means to like it, to accept it to the last degree. Our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' did not advise that hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' should be the first Khalifa. If he had advised so, it would have spread through tawatur and become known widely. If there had been such a command, be it by implication, the Amir 'radi-allahu anh' would have stated it, insisted on his due, and lodged an objection to Abu Bakr's caliphate. As a matter of fact, Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' quoted the hadith ash-Sharif, "Khalifas are from the Quraish tribe," and said that he would not assent to the caliphate of a person from the Ansar. And the Ansar, on their turn, agreed with him and forfeited their claim for caliphate. It is stated as follows in a commentary of the book Tajrid by Nasir-ed-din Tusi, [Allama Muhammad bin Muhammad Nasir-ed-din Tusi, 672 [C.E. 1273)]: "Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab fought against their own relatives and tribes for the sake of his way. They carried out all his commands with their utmost energy. They endured all sorts of difficulty in making progress in his way. They would not hesitate to sacrifice whatever they had for his sake. Now, what kind of mentality or understanding should a person have to admit the assertion that such faithful people as these disobeyed his open commandment and held an arbitrary election for caliphate even before his funeral. If there had been, let alone a commandment, a slight implication, a flimsy allusion (on the part of the Prophet) denoting that hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' were to be the first Khalifa, all of them would have raced to do it. Indeed, none of the scholars of Hadith has reported any commandment, or any implication, showing that hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh' should be made the first Khalifa; and those scholars who are known for their excessive fondness for hadrat Ali and who have always reported the hadith ash-Sharifs commending his high virtues and heroic accomplishments and his services to Islam, are no exception. Ali 'radi-allahu anh' did not utter a single word to allude that he deserved to be the (first) Khalifa, neither in his conversations or khutbas, nor during any of his struggles, nor on the occasions when he had to make talks, such as when there was some delay in the election of Abu Bakr as the Khalifa or when he was nominated to be one of the six candidates to succeed 'Umar in the office of caliphate. During the meeting held for the six nominees for caliphate, Abbas held his hand out to Ali 'radi-allahu anhuma' and said: Give me your hand! Let everybody see that the (paternal) uncle of the Messenger of Allah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' has made you Khalifa and obey you! He refused this."

The commandment warning against offending Fatima 'radi-allahu anha' is not an unexceptional commandment. For the Amir (Ali) 'radi- allahu anh' offended her a couple of times, and these behaviors of his were not considered culpable. By the same token, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' said to some of his wives: "Do not offend me by displeasing Aisha! Be it known that in her bed I am being revealed the wahy." On the other hand, hadrat Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' was really offended by hadrat Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. We can therefore say that the injunction, "Do not displease," in the hadith ash-Sharif, means, "Do not displease by falling for the desires of your nafs or the tricks of the devil." Otherwise, it would not be forbidden in cases of inevitability such as executing an Islamic principle or establishing the truth. The reason why Fatima 'radi-allahu anha' was offended with Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' was because he would not give her a share of inheritance from Fedek. [Fedek was a village rich in its date orchards in the vicinity of Hayber fortress. According to a peace treaty made with the Jews, half the village had been given to Rasulullah]. On account of a hadith ash-Sharif, which declared, "We, Prophets, do not leave inheritance. What we leave will become alms (to be given) to the poor," Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' divided the income from the dates and distributed it to the poor. Obeying this hadith ash-Sharif, he did not give a share to Fatima 'radi-allahu anha'. It would not be an offense because this behavior of his did not originate from his nafs or from the devil. Should it be asked why Fatima 'radi-allahu anh' was offended for something done with the sheer intention of obeying hadith ash-Sharif, our answer will be: Her taking offense was the result of a frailty inherent in the human nature; it was not an attitude assumed purposely. This offending, which is inevitable, is not forbidden.

3- The scholars of Mawara'un-nehr 'rahmat-ullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' stated: "Allahu ta'ala referred to Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' as the Prophet's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' sahib, that is, companion, in the fortieth ayat of Tawba sura. It would not be permissible to censure, to curse the Prophet's companion."

The booklet gives the following answer to this: The thirty-fifth ayat of Kehf sura purports, "As he spoke to his sahib (companion), he said: Thou hast disbelieved thine Rab (Allah), thine creator...". Here, a disbeliever also is referred to as the Prophet's sahib (companion). As a matter of fact, in the thirty-ninth ayat of Yusuf sura, Yusuf 'alaihis-salam' addressed the disbelievers 'my sahibs', by saying, "O my companions in the dungeon...". Yusuf's 'alaihis-salam' addressing two idolaters 'my sahibs' shows that the Prophet's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' referring to a person as his sahib (companion) does not necessarily mean that he is a good person.

Our answer is this: Companionship established with mutual love is certainly effective. It has been stated (by the 'Ulama) that denying the effect of Sohbat is a sign of ignorance. Since a Muslim and a disbeliever will not love each other, their sohbat will not produce any effect, any use. There is yet another fact we would like to point out to this effect. The so-called two idolaters were honored with becoming Muslims owing to the barakat, the fruitfulness of Yusuf's 'alaihis-salam' sohbat. Then, why should Rasulullah's sohbat not have had any effect on Siddiq (Abu Bakr) 'radi-allahu anh', who had always been with Rasulullah more than anyone else and loved him so much? Why should he not have benefited from his maturated marifats? Indeed, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated: "All the marifats, all the pieces of (occult) knowledge Allahu ta'ala has poured into my chest, I have poured into Abu Bakr's chest." The more the love and the attachment, the more the benefits that will be attained. It is for this reason that Abu Bakr Siddiq 'radi-allahu anh' became the highest of all the Ashab. For his attachment to Rasulullah was more than anybody else's. He (the Prophet) declared in a hadith ash-Sharif, "The superiority of Abu Bakr is not because he makes namaz and fasts very much, but because he has something in his heart." Our 'Ulama (profoundly learned Islamic scholars, savants) state that the thing he had in his heart was his love for Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. Then, how could it ever be justifiable to vilify, to curse such a companion?

4- The 'Ulama of Mawara'un-nehr state that: Amir Ali 'radi-allahu anh' accepted the three Khalifas although he was very powerful and very popular among the Ashab al-kiram. He did not raise any objections. This shows that the three Khalifas were rightful. Saying otherwise would mean to blame Ali 'radi-allahu anh'.

The following answer is given in the booklet: "As the Amir 'radi-allahu anh' was busy with the preparations for the funeral, the three Khalifas convened most of the Sahaba under the brushwood shelter called Bani Saida. They made Abu Bakr the Khalifa. Ali 'radi-allahu anh' heard about this. Yet he thought it would be futile to fight because he had few men and he did not want the good people to die, and for some other good reasons unknown to us. This does not show that Abu Bakr was right. For one thing, Ali 'radi-allahu anh' was very strong and brave, yet he and Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and many Sahaba migrated from Mecca to Medina without making any war. They considered it inappropriate to fight at that time. As they and fifteen hundred Sahabis were on their way to Mecca in the sixth year of the Hegira, they made peace at a place called Hudaybiya and returned (to Medina). Since it was permissible for Rasulullah and Ali and the other Sahaba not to fight at those places, it should certainly have been permissible for Ali not to make war by himself. As the fact that war was not made at those places would not show that the disbelievers of Quraish were right, so Ali's not making war would certainly not show that Abu Bakr was right. Likewise, Pharaoh maintained his claim to be a god for four hundred years in Egypt. Also, other kings such as Sheddad and Nimrod continued this corrupt claim for many years. Allahu ta'ala, the Almighty as He is, did not kill them. Even Allahu ta'ala does not hurry to avenge on His enemies; why should it not be permissible, then, for a born servant not to oppose his enemy? The Amir's acquiescence to their caliphate was intended to act toward the situation. It was not a willing acceptance.

Our answer to this will be: According to the 'Ulama of Mawara'un-nehr, Ali's not fighting Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anhuma', and obeying him, instead, shows that he (Abu Bakr) was the rightly-guided Khalifa. And this fact cannot be refuted or denied by making a comparison of it to Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' not fighting against the disbelievers of Quraish or Allahu ta'ala's delaying the killing of His enemies such as Pharaoh, Sheddad and Nimrod. These examples given in the booklet confute its own argument. For Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and Allahu ta'ala always reproved these enemies of theirs. They stated that those enemies were always evil and base. How can those people be examples for this case? Where is the similarity? Thwarted by the multitude of the reports stating that Ali accepted Abu Bakr's caliphate and obeyed him 'radi-allahu anhuma', and seeing that it would be futile to deny this fact, these people have to change their course, and say that Ali accepted it unvillingly in order to act toward the situation. They cannot find a better answer to prove that Abu Bakr's 'radi-allahu anh' caliphate was unjust. They cannot find another way to resolve the dilemma they have driven themselves into. At this point, it will be appropriate to relate how Abu Bakr 'radi- allahu anh' was elected the Khalifa. We shall therefore have recourse to the most reliable sources, thus proving at the same time that it would be impossible to degrade Ali 'radi- allahu anh' to the contemptible state of having committed a wrong deed in order to act toward the situation because of the overpowering conditions.

When Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away, the Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain' set about the election of the Khalifa before beginning the procedures of funeral. They considered it their primary duty to find a president for the believers. For there were some commandments of Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' to be carried out, such as the execution of the punishments called (Hadd), defending the country against enemies, organizing an army to this end, and the like. And these tasks, in their turn, could be performed only by the State. It was wajib, therefore, for the Muslims to elect a president for the State. Upon hearing about Rasulullah's passing away, most people became so sad that they were at a loss as to what to do, and many others were verging on the insane. Someone to bandage this very serious wound of the people and to diminish the severe pains was prerequisite. Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh', in a serene temperance inherent in his immaculately maturated character, convened the Ashab al-kiram, and said aloud:

"O thou the blessed Companions of the Prophet 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain'! If anyone here is worshipping Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', let him know that he is dead. And whoever is worshipping Allahu ta'ala should know that He is always alive. He will never die!" The rest of his speech was equally effective. Yet, when he heard that the Ansar had come together in order to elect the Khalifa from among themselves, he went to their meeting place, taking Abu Ubaida and 'Umar along. He said to them, "I have heard that you have been electing to perform and execute the commandments of Allahu ta'ala. Think and search! The Khalifa is to be from among the Quraish (tribe)." Then, pointing to Abu Ubaida and 'Umar, he added, "Elect one of these people." Upon this, 'Umar said, "You are the Khalifa, O Abu Bakr," holding out his hand to him. All the Ansar unanimously agreed to his caliphate. The following day he went to the mosque and mounted the minber. He looked at the jamaat (Muslims), and saw that Zubair bin Awwam was not among them. He sent for him and, when Zubair came, he asked him, "Do you have anything against this unanimity of Muslims?" Zubair said, "O the Khalifa of the Messenger! I have nothing against it," and he held out his hand in submission. The Khalifa looked around once again. When he did not see Ali 'radi-allahu anh', he sent for him. When the Amir came, he said to him, "Do you want to be opposed to this unanimity of Muslims?" Ali, too, held out his hand in submission and said, "O the Khalifa of the Messenger! I am not opposed." Zubair and Ali apologized for being late to accept the Khalifa. They said, "We were sorry because we had not been informed about the caliphate election. We know very well that no one among us would be more rightful to the office of caliphate than Abu Bakr is. For he has been honored with being (the Prophet's) companion in the cave. We are very well aware of his honor, his superiority. Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' chose him among us as the imam to conduct the namaz." [Zubair bin Awwam 'radi-allahu anh' is one of the ten fortunated who were given the good news (by Allahu ta'ala) that "they shall enter Paradise." His parents were the brother of our mother Hadija and Rasulullah's paternal aunt Safiyya. He became a Muslim when he was fifteen years old. He was the first Muslim to draw his sword, the first to migrate to Abyssinia, and the first to migrate to Medina. He received numerous wounds in the Holy Wars of Badr, Uhud, Hendek (Trench), Hudaybiya, Hayber, Mecca, Hunayn, and Taif. He joined the conquest of Egypt, too. He was very rich. He gave all his wealth in the way of Allah. He was against hadrat Ali in the event of Camel. He was martyred in the thirty-sixth year (of the Hijrat), when he was sixty-seven years old].

Imam-i-Muhammad Shafi'i 'rahmatullahi alaih' [150- 204 (C.E. 819), in Egypt] states: "When Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away, the Ashab al-kiram considered and searched, and finally decided that no one on the earth could be superior to Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh.' They unanimously made him the Khalifa." The Ashab al-kiram 'radi-allahu anhum' unanimously wanted to make one of the following (three) people the Khalifa: Abu Bakr, Ali, and Abbas 'radi-allahu anhum'. Ali and Abbas said nothing against the caliphate of Abu Bakr. They both accepted the caliphate of Abu Bakr. Thus Abu Bakr was unanimously elected the Khalifa. If Abu Bakr had not been the rightful Khalifa, Ali and Abbas would have opposed it and demanded their rights. As a matter of fact, (later) Ali 'radi-allahu anh' did not accept the caliphate of Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' because he did not consider it rightful. Although Muawiya's army was more powerful than his, he insisted on his due and caused many people to die. On the other hand, it would have been much easier for him to oppose Abu Bakr, and he would have been elected the Khalifa. For that time was closer to the time of Rasulullah 'sal-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and therefore people were more inclined to find out (and do) what was right. Furthermore, Abbas offered Ali to be the Khalifa, yet he refused it. If he had considered himself to be more rightful, he would have accepted it. Indeed, Zubair and all the sons of Hashim, with all their great fame and bravery, and many other Sahabis were with Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. This ijma' [unanimity] would suffice to prove the fact that Abu Bakr was the rightful Khalifa. And the fact that there is not a single commandment or even an implication to contradict this, emphasizes the state of rightfulness. In fact, according to the majority of scholars, the ijma'-i-ummat, that is, unanimity of the Ashab, is more dependable than a commandment which is not mesh-hur (narrated by all scholars unanimously). For something on which there was ijma' (unanimity of the Ashab) is certainly true. A commandment which is not mesh-hur, on the other hand, is supposed to be true. We would like to add at this point that there are implications, even commandments advising that Abu Bakr should be the (first) Khalifa. The profoundly learned 'Ulama of Tafsir and Hadith have reported them. It is true that there are no such commandments according to the majority of the profound scholars of the Ahl as-sunnat. Yet this same statement shows that others do not have the right, either. Hence it becomes obvious that Abu Bakr became the Khalifa rightfully by the unanimous vote (of the Sahaba) and Ali cannot be said to have acted toward the situation unwilling as he was. If the Sahaba had been the kind of people who would not have accepted the truth, then (the probability of Ali's) having acted toward the situation might be considered. How could Ali 'radi-allahu anh' ever be reproached with having abdicated a right in order to handle people honored with the hadith ash-Sharif, "The best of times is my time."?

'Uthman bin Abd-ur-Rahman Ibn-is-salah, [his book Aqs-ul-amal was printed in London; 577-643 (C.E. 1245)], and Ab-ul-'azim Munziri [581-656] 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihima' state: The Ashab al-kiram were all equitable people. It is an absolute fact that all the Ashab al-kiram will go to Paradise. The tenth ayat of Hadid sura purports, "O believers! Among you, the ones who gave their property and fought for the sake of Allahu ta'ala before the conquest of Mecca, will have higher grades than those who gave (property) and fought after the conquest of Mecca. They are not equal with respect to their ranks. I promise them all (that I shall give them) Paradise." This means to say that all the Ashab al-kiram shall enter Paradise. That the promise made in this ayat al-karima is given to those who sacrificed their property and lives does not necessarily mean that the ones who did not give alms or make jihad (Holy War) will not enter Paradise. [It is stated in the tafsirs of Baidawi and Husaini and Mawaqib that, according to the majority of mufassirs (profoundly learned savants who make explanations of Qur'an al-karim), this ayat al- karima was revealed in order to inform with the high honor Abu Bakr as-Siddiq had. For he was first to have iman and to dispense his property and to fight against disbelievers].

To assert that "Ali 'radi-allahu anh' accepted (the caliphate of) hadrat Abu Bakr unwillingly, in order to get along well," means to disparage that Lion of Allah. For it is a sin not to tell the truth. And doing something unwillingly is what the meanest believer would hate. Could the Amir, the Lion of Allah, the son-in-law of the Messenger of Allah, the peerless representative of valor and heroism, ever have lowered himself to the mediocre state of doing such repugnant acts? Their ignorance, blended with gross excessiveness, drives them into the ludicrous position of depreciating hadrat Ali 'radi- allahu anh' in the name of appreciating him. While downgrading him, they think they are extolling him.

5- The 'Ulama of Mawara'un-nehr 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain state: To curse, to vituperate the three Khalifas or a few of the pure blessed wives of Rasulullah is disbelief. If a person says it is permissible, he must be punished.

The following answer is given to this in the booklet: The commentator of (the book) Aqaid-i-Nasafi does not agree that it will cause disbelief to curse the Shaikhayn [Abu Bakr and 'Umar]. [The book Aqaid-i-Nasafiyya was written by 'Umar ibni Muhammad Nasafi (461-537, in Semerkand). The book of fiqh titled Zahira is very valuable. Many scholars wrote commentaries for Aqaid-i-Nasafiyya. Its most celebrated commentary is that of Masud bin 'Umar Sad-ad-din-i-Taftazani (722-799, in Semmerkand)]. The author of Jami'ul-usul considers those people who curse the Shaikhayn to be among the Muslim groups. Also, the book Mawaqif states so. [The book Jami'ul-usul was written by Mubarak bin Muhammad Ibn Asir (544-606, in Musul). The book Mawaqif was written by Qadi Adud Abd-ur-Rahman bin Ahmad. It is a very valuable book of Aqaid (principles of Islamic belief). Among its commentaries, the most celebrated ones are that of Sayyid Sharif Ali bin Muhammad Jurjani [740-816, in Shiraz], and that of Muhammad bin Asad Jelal-ad-din Dawani. Dawani's Persian book, Akhlaq-i-Jalali, is famous; it was printed and translated into English. The explanation of Sayyid Sharif Ali's commentary, made by Abd- ul-hakim Siyalkuti Hindi [1068 (C.E. 1658), in India], is well-known and was printed]. Imam-i-Muhammad Ghazali [450-505 (C.E. 1111), in Tus city] says that it is not disbelief to curse the Shaikhayn. Abul-Hasan Ashari [Ali bin Ismail, 266-330 (C.E. 941), in Baghdad] says that a person who performs his duty of namaz cannot be called a disbeliever. Then, considering the people who curse the Shaikhayn to be disbelievers, is an attitude contradictory to the books of the Islamic scholars, to Qur'an al-karim, and to hadith ash-Sharifs.

We give the following answer: It is disbelief to curse the Shaikhayn (Abu Bakr and 'Umar) 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhuma'. The hadith ash-Sharifs show that it is disbelief. It is declared as follows in a hadith ash-Sharif reported by Tabarani [Sulaiman bin Ahmad, 260-360 (C.E. 971), in Isfehan] and by Hakim [Muhammad bin Abdullah, 321-405 (C.E. 1014), in Nishapur]: "Allahu ta'ala has chosen me. And He has chosen the best ones of mankind as my Ashab [Companions]. From among my Ashab, He has selected viziers, assistants, relatives for me. If a person curses them, may Allahu ta'ala and angels and human beings curse him! Allahu ta'ala will not accept the fard or sunnat worships of those people who curse them." A hadith ash-Sharif reported by the Hadith scholar Ali bin 'Umar Daraqutni declares: "After me, some people will appear. If you meet them, kill them! For they are polytheists [disbelievers]." Ali 'radi-allahu anh' asked, "What is their sign?" He (Rasulullah) declared, "They will make an excessive display of attachment to you. They will say about you what you do not have. They will censure the religious superiors coming before them." [Daraqutn is a village in Baghdad. 306-385, in Baghdad]. In the same book, he (Rasulullah) declared, "These people censure Abu Bakr and 'Umar. They swear at them. May Allahu ta'ala and angels and all human beings curse those who swear at my Ashab." There are very many similar hadith ash-Sharifs, and since most of them are well- known, it is unnecessary to quote them here.

Cursing the Shaikhayn means enmity towards them. And enmity towards them, in its turn, is disbelief. For it is declared in a hadith ash- Sharif, "Enmity towards them is enmity towards me. To hurt them means to hurt me. And to hurt me means to torment Allahu ta'ala." It is declared in a hadith ash-Sharif reported by Ali bin Hasan ibni Asakir [499-571, in Damascus], "It is iman to love Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma'. Enmity towards them is kufr (disbelief)." It is declared in a hadith ash-Sharif, "If a person says to a believer something which states that he is a disbeliever, [if he says, for instance, 'O you the enemy of Allahu ta'ala!'], he himself becomes a disbeliever." Then, a person who calls the Shaikhayn disbelievers or considers them to be disbelievers will become a disbeliever himself. We know for certain that Abu Bakr and 'Umar 'radi-allahu anhuma' are believers. They are not enemies of Allahu ta'ala. They have been blessed with the good news (that they shall attain) Paradise. Then, a person who calls them disbelievers will become a disbeliever. It is true that the hadith ash-Sharif quoted above is reported by only one person. Yet it shows that a person who calls a believer a disbeliever will become a disbeliever. Nevertheless, a person who denies this will not become a disbeliever. Abu Zur'a Razi, a great contemporary scholar, states, "If a person vituperates one of Rasulullah's 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' Ashab, he is a zindiq. For Qur'an al-karim is certainly true. Rasulullah certainly tells the truth. The information we have been receiving from them is certainly true. All this information praise, laud the Ashab al-kiram. To speak ill of them means to deny Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs. And this, in its turn, is blasphemy, heresy, and aberration." Sehl bin Abdullah Tusturi [200-283 (C.E. 896), in Basra] states, "A person who does not esteem the Ashab al-kiram has not had iman in Rasulullah." Abdullah bin Mubarak [116-181 (C.E. 797), in Iraq] was asked, "Which person is higher; Muawiya, or 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz?" He replied, "The dust that entered the nose of Muawiya's [d. 60 (C.E. 680), when he was seventy-nine years old] horse as he escorted Rasulullah, is many times higher than 'Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz." Thus he informed that no degree of highness could reach the level attained by being in Rasulullah's sohbat and seeing his blessed face. ['Umar bin Abd-ul-'aziz, the eighth Emewee (Umayyad) Khalifa, was a profoundly learned, extremely pious person. He was martyred in the year 101, when he was forty-one years old. He bought Malatya from the Byzantine Greeks in return for a hundred thousand slaves]. This kind of superiority, which is the sheer result of sohbat with the exclusion of all other personal virtues is common in all the Ashab al-kiram. When the other types of virtues are added to this superiority; for instance, a Sahabi who made jihad with Rasulullah and who taught the believers coming after him what he had learned from him and who devoted his property for his sake, must be even more superior, higher. There is no doubt that the (first) two Khalifas were among the higher ones of the Ashab al-kiram. They were even the highest ones. Then, it would be disbelief to attribute the slightest inferiority to the Shaikhayn, nonetheless for calling them disbelievers. It would mean blasphemy, aberration. It is stated as follows in the book Muhit, written by Shams-ul-aimma Muhammad bin Ahmad Serahsee [483 (C.E. 1090), in Turkistan]: "It is not permissible to perform namaz behind an imam (who is notorious for his) vituperating the Shaikhayn. For that person denies the fact that Abu Bakr 'radi-allahu anh' was the Khalifa. On the other hand, the fact that he (Abu Bakr) was rightfully elected the Khalifa has been acknowledged unanimously by all the Ashab al-kiram." It is stated as follows in the book of fatwa named Hulasa, written by Tahir bin Ahmad Bukhari: "If a person denies the caliphate of Abu Bakr, he becomes a disbeliever. It is makruh (not liked by Rasulullah, though not forbidden) to perform the namaz conducted by a bidat ( Bidat is any act, any behavior, any belief, any prayer or worship that did not exist in Islam originally and which was fabricated later in the name of religion. All kinds of bidat are somehow harmful to Islam.) holder. If the bidat he holds is so bad as to cause disbelief, the namaz conducted by him will not be sahih (accepted). If it is not so bad as disbelief the namaz will be sahih but makruh. It is almost equally true that a person who denies the caliphate of hadrat 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' will become a disbeliever." In light of the fact that a person who denies their caliphates will become a disbeliever, one should imagine the destiny awaiting those people who vilify and curse them. As it is seen, to call such eccentricities disbelief is exactly concordant with hadith ash-Sharifs and the statements made by the Islamic 'Ulama. When some of the Ahl as-sunnat scholars 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' said that these people should not be called disbelievers, they meant those who were not excessive in their eccentricities. Their statements are therefore in agreement with the hadith ash-Sharifs and the statements of the (other Islamic) 'Ulama.

The booklet curses, vituperates Aisha-i-Siddiqa 'radi-allahu ta'ala anha', too. These people assert that she is to be cursed because she disobeyed the ayat al-karima and the hadith ash-Sharif. They traduce her - may Allahu ta'ala protect us from doing such an ignoble act. They say, "It was commanded, 'Stay in your homes', in the ayat al-karima. Disobeying this commandment, she fought Ali 'radi-allahu anh' in the event of Camel. On the other hand, it had been stated in a hadith ash-Sharif, 'He who fights you will have fought me.' This means to say that fighting Ali means fighting Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'. And he who fights the Prophet will become a disbeliever. For this reason, it is necessary to censure, to curse Aisha."

Our answer is this: The commandment, "Stay in your homes," does not mean, "Always sit in your home in all circumstances. Never go out." The fact that some of Rasulullah's wives accompanied him in some of his expeditions shows that the truth is not as they state. This means to say that the commandment to stay in homes was intended for certain occasions and situations. It is like expressing something as a whole while meaning a part of it. Such statements are not absolute commandments. It is permissible for a mujtahid, therefore, to infer another part from this whole. For there are some qualities common in all the parts. Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' was doubtless a learned scholar and a mujtahid. Abu Musal-Ashari [one of Rasulullah's governors. He introduced the custom of putting dates on written documents, letters, etc. He passed away in Kufa in 51] states in Tirmuzi's book: Whenever the Ashab al-kiram wanted to know something, they would go and ask hadrat Aisha and learn from her. Musa bin Talha states, again in Tirmuzi's book: I saw no one who could talk more eloquently, more correctly than Aisha did. Owing to the profound knowledge she had, Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' understood the inner meaning of the ayat al-karima, followed the exceptional cases which made it permissible for her to go out, and went out. The meaning inferred from the ayat al-karima is, "Do not go out without covering yourselves." Indeed, the final part of the ayat al- karima purports, "Do not show your ornaments, jewels to men, as was done by women in the time of nescience (the time before Islam)!" This means to say that it is permissible (for women) to go out with something to cover themselves. Aisha's 'radi-allahu anh' going out in the event of Camel was not intended to make war. It was intended to quell the fitna and restore peace. Even if it had been intended for war as the historians interpret it, nothing could be said against it. For she acted upon (her) ijtihad. She did not go out only because she wished to do so. As a matter of fact, as Sharh-i-mawaqif narrates from Seyf-ud-din Ali Amidi 'rahmatullahi alaih', the events of Camel and Siffin were on account of ijtihad. If a mujtehid is wrong (in his or her ijtihad), he (or she) cannot be blamed for this. The sixty- eighth ayat of Enfal sura purports, "Had it not been for the book of Allahu ta'ala beforehand, you would suffer great torment on account of what you have done." Baidawi explains this ayat as follows: "Allahu ta'ala wrote in the Lawh al-Mahfuz beforehand that He will not torment unless what He has clearly forbidden is committed. If He had not foreordained that he would not torment for erring or mistaking... ." Another fact we would like to point out is that a mujtehid's erring is a rahmat (compassion), a hidayat (guidance to the right way and salvation) from Allahu ta'ala. 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' states in a book (written) by Rezin bin Muawiya (524), one of the sons of Abduddar bin Qusay, that Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated: "I asked my Rabb (Allahu ta'ala) about the disagreements (that will occur) among my Ashab after me. My Rabb intimated to me: O My beloved Prophet Muhammad 'alaihis-salatu wa-ssalam'! Your Ashab are like the stars in the sky. Some of them are brighter than others. They all emit lights. A person who follows one of them will attain hidayat." Then he stated this hadith ash-Sharif: "My Ashab are like the stars in the sky. If you follow any one of them you will attain hidayat (guidance to the right way) and salamat (salvation)."

Perhaps Aisha 'radi-allahu anh' had not heard about the hadith ash-Sharif, "O Ali! He who fights you will have fought me." Or perhaps a certain fighting was meant. Or perhaps the wars he made during the Asr-i-Saadat are meant.

In order to convince others and to defeat the Ahl as-sunnat, (the author of) the booklet says: "The Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' was talking with Ibni Umm-i-Mektum, who was sightless in both eyes, when one of his (the Prophet's) wives came near them. Annoyed, the Prophet stated, 'He may not see, but you do (see)!' While it was so strongly prohibited for women to show themselves to men, it is written in the Sunnite books how Aisha 'radi-allahu anh' leaned her head on the Prophet's shoulder and watched the men playing (musical) instruments and dancing. The Prophet stated, 'Are you still not sated, o Humeyra?' We could not say that the basest people would do the same." Our answer is this: This behavior of watching the dances may have happened before the ayat al-karima commanding (women) to cover themselves was revealed. On the other hand, (the Prophet's) prohibiting (his blessed wife) from showing herself to Ibni Mektum occurred after the revelation of the ayat al-karima. Or, perhaps, the dances watched were those kinds of dances that were not forbidden; they may have been permissible kinds of dances. As a matter of fact, (some) sahih (authentic) reports show that bayonet dances were performed in the yard of Masjid an-Nabi. And this, in its turn, being a war dance, is not sinful. Indeed, the fact that it was performed in the yard of the Masjid (Mosque) indicates that it was permissible. Even if the watching of the dances had occurred after the revelation of the ayat al-karima, Aisha 'radi-allahu anh' was too young then. She was not liable (to religious commandments) yet. In fact, Bukhari and Muslim quote her (hadrat Aisha) as relating, "Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' was standing in the door of the room. Some Abyssinians were doing a dance on the Mihrab of the Masjid. Rasulullah 'sall- allahu alaihi wa sallam' covered me with a cloth that was on his blessed back. I watched the dance, looking through the aperture between his blessed ear and neck."

It should be known very well that meddling with the behaviors of the Ashab al-kiram, and saying whatever occurs to one's mind about them, is the lowest degree of insolence and the last grade of asininity a Muslim could do. A person who bears the name Muslim should love all the Ashab al-kiram, leaving the disagreements and rows among them to Allahu ta'ala. He should know that loving them means loving Muhammad 'alaihis-salam'. For the Messenger of Allah stated, "He who loves them, loves them because he loves me." This is the only way to salvation for a Muslim. Imam-i-Muhammad bin Idris Shafi'i 'rahmatullahi alaih' states, "As Allahu ta'ala has protected our hands from being smeared with the blood shed among the Ashab al-kiram, so we should protect our tongues from poking into it." 'Umar bin Abdulaziz also made a similar statement. [Sayyid Ahmad bin Ali Rifai [512-578 (C.E. 1183), in Umm-i-Ubaid, in the neighborhood of Basra] states as follows in the seventy-eighth page of the Turkish book titled Ahmad Rifai, which was printed in Istanbul in 1340: "It is never permissible to exceed the limit (prescribed by the 'Ulama) in talking about the events that took place among the Ashab al-kiram 'alaihim-ur-ridwan' or to pronounce judgements on them. Every Muslim should be discreetly reticent about the Ashab al-kiram, always mention their virtues, love and praise them all."] However, some people speak ill of the Ashab al-kiram. They are so daring as to vituperate, curse those people who are Islam's most beloved personages. It is necessary for the Islamic 'Ulama 'rahmatullahi ta'ala alaihim ajmain' to answer them, to refute them, to explain that their way of thinking is erroneous, unhealthy. It is to this end that this faqir, [that is, Imam-i- Rabbani, mujaddid-i-alf-i-Thani, Ahmad Faruqi 'rahmatullahi alaih' [971-1034 (C.E. 1624), in Sirhind, India], have written a few words. Ya Rabbi (O my Allah)! Do not punish us for what we have forgotten or for our mistakes! This is the end of the answer which this faqir has had the lucky chance to write in order to rebut and chagrin the author of the book I have read. May Allahu ta'ala place in our hearts the love of His religion! May He honor us all with making progress in the way of His beloved Prophet Muhammad 'alaihis-salatu wassalam'! Amin.

The thirty-sixth letter of the second volume of the book Maktubat, written by the great alim and Qayyum-i-alam, hadrat Shaikh Muhammad Mathum bin Ahmad Faruqi 'quddisa sirruhuma' [1009-1079 (C.E. 1667), in Sirhind] who was a qayyum-i-alam and one of the very rare scholars educated throughout centuries, answers various long questions. It has been considered appropriate at this point to translate only the answer to the eighth question in the letter:

Question: It is stated as follows in the book Sharh-i-Diwan-i-kutub-i-tawarih: "When hadrat Amir 'karram-allahu ta'ala wajhah' detected the fact that some people were nursing a grudge against him, he began to utter maledictions against five people including Muawiya 'radi-allahu ta'ala anh' after each of the five daily prayers of namaz. Upon hearing about this, they (these five people) began to utter curses after each of the five daily prayers upon five people, who were hadrat Amir (Ali), hadrat Hasan, hadrat Husain, Abdullah ibni Abbas and Malik-i-Ejder 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain'. In fact, the Khalifas of Bani Umayya spread this ignoble practice far and near. In khutbas they pronounced curses upon the Ahl al-bayt. This practice continued until 'Umar bin Abd-ul-Aziz canceled it. 'Umar bin Abd-ul Aziz annulled this malediction and recited the ninetieth ayat al-karima of Nahl sura for its place." Did this vile event really take place, or not?

Answer: Hadrat Amir 'karram-allahu ta'ala wajhah', who was rahmat from head to foot, never, never cursed any Muslim at all, none the less for uttering maledictions against the Ashab of our master, the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam', especially against Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh', on whom the Messenger of Allah asked a blessing many times. Hadrat Amir said about those who were with Muawiya, "Our brothers have not agreed with us. They are not disbelievers or sinners. They have acted on their ijtihad." This statement of his keeps disbelief and sinfulness away from them. Why should he have cursed them, then? The Islamic religion does not contain a kind of worship comprising malediction, be it against the worst unbeliever. Since it is necessary to utter benedictions and to ask blessings after the five daily prayers of namaz, why should he have given up benedictions for the sake of maledictions which would have served only for the appeasing of personal hatred. Do these people put down hadrat Amir, who had attained the highest grade of Fana ( The highest grade of Tasawwuf. In this grade the person concerned totally forgets about his own existence and disappears into the existence of Allahu ta'ala.) and the end of Itminan (The grade in which the malignant component existent in man's nature, which is called NAFS, forgets about its own sensuous desires and adapts itself to the commandments of Allahu ta'ala.) completely renounced his personal desires, as a simpleton whose nafs seethed with grudge, contumacy, animosity like their own nafs-i-emmara (The malignant being in man's nature; all the desires of the nafs run counter to the commandments of Allahu ta'ala. It is one's nafs that causes one to feel reluctant to do Islam's commandments. And it is this very nafs again that may tempt one into the very dangerous position of being proud of the worships one has done.)? Is it this stupid supposition that causes them to traduce that very exalted person in such a despicable way as this? Hadrat Amir had attained the highest grades of Fana fi-llah (see footnotes) and Muhabbat-i-Rasulillah (love of the Messenger of Allah), and had relinquished his life and property for the sake of his 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' way. Why should he have wasted the time allotted for him to pray cursing his (supposed) enemies instead of spending it, for instance, pronouncing maledictions upon the enemies of Allahu ta'ala and His Messenger 'sall-allahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam', upon those people who had inflicted all sorts of torture and persecution on the Sultan of both worlds, our master, the beloved Prophet of Allahu ta'ala 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam'? On the other hand, his statement, "They have acted on their ijtihad," shows that he was not hostile to them. The truth is that the wars and controversies between them did not stem from inimical feelings, nor were they based on inveterate bitternesses such as grudge. They were the results of ijtihad and tawil. There could have been no place for criticizing, let alone cursing, in this business. If it were a pious act, a worship to vituperate or curse a person, it would have been one of the requirements of Islam to curse the accursed devil, Abu Jahl, Abu Lahab, and the other ferocious, unbelievers of Quraish who hurt, persecuted and tormented our master the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' and who perpetrated so many pernicious acts of turpitude against this true religion. Inasmuch as it is not a commandment to curse the enemies, how could it be a pious act to curse the friends? Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' stated, "If a person curses the Shaitan (Satan), he (the Satan) will say, 'I am the accursed already. Your cursing will not give me any (additional) harm'. If a person supplicates, "Ya Rabbi (o my Allah)! Protect me against the Shaitan', he (the Shaitan) will say, 'You have broken my back.' " This comes to mean that the allegations above are slanders, calumniations against hadrat Amir. On the other hand, to say that Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' began to curse hadrat Amir, hadrat Hasan, hadrat Husain, and the others 'radi-allahu anhum ajmain' would mean to slander hadrat Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh'. You say, "Did this event really take place? If it did, why should it not be normal to curse Muawiya and the others? If it did not happen, what is the meaning in the book of Tafsir of Kash-shaf (the book titled Sharh-i-Diwan-i-kutub-i-tawarih)?" Our answer is: No, it did not take place. According to the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat wal- jamaat (the scholars of the Sunni way), it is not permissible to speak ill of Muawiya 'radi- allahu anh'. The allegation (above) is intended to traduce him. In addition, there is not a true report in this respect. Historians narrate it; yet how can their narration be of documentary value? Religious principles cannot be based on historians' statements. In this matter the statements of Imam-i-azam Abu Hanifa and his Ashab (companions) are to be taken into consideration; not the statements of historians or the narratives written in Kash- shaf. Neither the Amir's name nor Muawiya's is mentioned in the writings that you say have been derived from Kash-shaf. Nor is it so much as hinted that those two great personages of Islam exchanged maledictions. The writings (in the book mentioned) are entirely true. There is nothing running counter to our knowledge. Why, then, should we search for an agreeable meaning? Yes, the Khalifas of Bani Umayya had the Ahl al-bayt cursed throughout the (religious sermons given on the) minbers (in mosques) for many years. 'Umar bin Abd-ul-Aziz put an end to this practice. May Allahu ta'ala give him plenty of rewards! Yet Muawiya, one of the Umayyad Khalifas as he was, is an exempt. Cursing or vituperating Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' would mean cursing or vituperating a considerable number of the Ashab al-kiram who joined these controversies and wars with him, and among them were a few of the Ashara-i-mubash-shara [the ten people who were given the good news while they were still living that they would go to Paradise after death]. And speaking ill of these great religious authorities would in its turn mean rejecting and vitiating the religious information coming to us from them. No Muslim would see this appropriate or agreeable.

Sir! I will explain to you the two Madhhabs in this matter. The word of the Ahl as-sunnat wal-jamaat, and the word of others. Some people speak ill of the three Khalifas and Muawiya and those who followed him. They curse them. They say that after our Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' all the Ashab became renegades, with a few exceptions. According to the Madhhab of Ahl as-sunnat wal-jamaat, the Ashab of our master the Prophet 'sall-allahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam' cannot be spoken of but in favorable terms. None of them is bad or evil. The hadith ash-Sharif, "He who loves them, loves them because he loves me. He who is inimical to them, is so because he is inimical to me," commands us to love them all. We should know that the fights and combats between them were done with good intentions. We must consider and hold them quite far from the wicked and base desires and the recalcitrance inherent in the human nafs. Imam-i- Yahya bin Sharaf Nawawi [631-676 (C.E. 1274), in Damascus] states in his explanation of the hadiths in Muslim that the Ashab al-kiram parted into three groups in the combats that took place in the time of Imam-i-Ali 'radi-allahu anh'. The ijtihad of one group showed them that the Amir 'radi-allahu anh' was right. It was wajib for them to follow the way agreeable with their ijtihad. So all of them helped hadrat Amir. Another group of the Ashab failed to reach a conclusion in their ijtihad. It was therefore wajib for them not to interfere with the matters at all. A third group, on the other hand, came to the conclusion in their ijtihad that those who were opposed to the Amir were right. So it was wajib for the owners of this ijtihad to support the opposing party. This means to say that each group acted upon their own ijtihad. For this reason, it would be wrong to blame any one of them. However, hadrat Amir and those who followed him because their ijtihad agreed with his had found the truth in their ijtihad. Those who were opposed to them were wrong in their ijtihad. Yet, for their error pertaining to ijtihad, they cannot be criticized or blamed. Whereas the erroneous party deserved one thawab( Reward; act, behavior, belief, or thought for which Allahu ta'ala promises reward in the Hereafter; the reward that will be given.), the group who explored the truth deserved ten thawabs. Imam-i-Shafi'i 'rahmat- ullahi alaih' stated, 'As Allahu ta'ala has protected us from getting our hands smeared with their blood, so should we protect our tongues." This valuable statement indicates that it would be wrong even to utter the word 'wrong' about them and that we should mention even their errors with (respect and) good will. All this adds up to mean that a person who dislikes Muawiya 'radi-allahu anh' and curses him cannot be in the group of Ahl-i-sunnat wa jamaat. Now, the Shiis will hate him, too. For they hate any person who likes the three Khalifas. Therefore this person is neither Sunni nor Shii. He must have taken up a third way.

If you still have doubts as to the teachings of the scholars of Ahl as-sunnat concerning the disagreements that occurred among the Ashab al-kiram, you should read dependable books on itiqad (Islamic belief), which explain all facts one by one and in detail. You should not believe the incongruous, untenable statements fabricated afterwards. This is the end of the translation of the thirty-sixth letter. With a view to ending this writing of ours in beautiful statements, we are writing about the honorable deeds, praises and virtues of the Ahl al-bayt 'radi-allahu anhum':

The thirty-third ayat of Ahzab sura purports, "O the Ahl al-bayt of My Beloved One! Allahu ta'ala wishes you to be sinless." Most of the Mufassirs (scholars skilled in explaining the ayats of Qur'an al-karim) have stated that this ayat al-karima came for Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhum'. Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' stated so, too. There are also those (scholars) who say that it was revealed for his (the Prophet's) blessed wives 'radi-allahu anhunna'. For the ayat al-karima following this clearly addresses to his wives. Abu Said-i-Hudri, [was thirteen years old when the Holy War of Uhud was made. He passed away in 64 (Hijri). His grave is believed to be in the yard of Qariya Mosque at Ayvansaray, Istanbul], is quoted as having said as follows in the book Musnad, by Ahmad bin Hanbal [164-241 (C.E. 855), in Baghdad]: This ayat al-karima came for Rasulullah, Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husain. These five people are called Ahl-i- aba, which means 'covered with cloak.' According to Ahmad bin Muhammad Salabi [427 (C.E. 1036), in Nishapur], the word 'Ahl al-bayt' in this ayat al-karima means 'the Sons of Hashim', (or Hashemites). And the word 'rijs' used in the ayat al-karima means 'to sin', 'to doubt about the principles of belief'. Then, these people (Hashemites, or Hashimites) will never enter Hell. Sad ibni Abi Waqqas 'radi-allahu anh', [one of the Ashara-i-mubash- shara. He was in his seventeenth year when he became the seventh earliest Muslim. He joined all the Holy Wars. He was the first archer who threw an arrow. He was a very good marksman. He was the commander-in-chief of the Islamic army that won a victory in Qadsiya and erased the magian Iranian State from the pages of history. 55 (Hijri), in Medina], stated: When the sixty-first ayat of Al-i-'Imran sura, which purports, "Come; Let us call Our children and your children", was revealed, Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' called Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husain 'radi-allahu ta'ala alaihim ajmain', and stated, "Ya Rabbi! These are my Ahl al-bayt."

Musawwir bin Mahrama 'radi-allahu anh', [attained martyrdom when he was hit by a stone flung by a mangonel as he was performing namaz. 2-64, in Medina], quoted Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' as having stated, "Fatima 'radi-allahu anha' is a piece from me. He who annoys her will have hurt me (by doing so)." [She was thirteen years old during the Hijrat (Hegira). When she was fifteen years of age, she was married to Ali 'radi-allahu anh', who was twenty-five years old then. She passed away in Medina in the eleventh year of Hijrat, six months after the Prophet's passing away].

Abu Huraira 'radi-allahu anh', [became a Muslim during (the Holy War) Hayber, and presently joined the Holy War. A very poor man as he was, he would always keep Rasulullah company. Muawiya appointed him governor of Medina. He passed away in 59, when he was seventy-nine years old. In Medina], relates: I was with the Messenger of Allah, when Hasan came. He (Rasulullah) supplicated, "Ya Rabbi! I love this (grandson of mine). (Please), You, too, love him and (love) also those who love him!" Anas bin Malik, [was in Rasulullah's service for ten years. He lived more than a hundred years], stated, "No one else resembled Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' more than Hasan did." And he said at some other time, "Husain radi-allahu anh' resembled Rasulullah very much." Zayd bin Erqam, [was a small boy at the time of the Holy War of Uhud. He joined the other seventeen Holy Wars. 61 (Hijri), in Kufa], quotes Rasulullah as saying, "I am leaving two things over to you after me. If you adhere to these (two things) you will not leave the (right) way. One of them is greater than the other. One of them is Qur'an al- karim, the Holy Book of Allahu ta'ala; it is like a strong rope extending from heaven down to earth. The second one is my Ahl al-bayt. These two are inseparable. If a person dissents from them, he will have abandoned my way." In another hadith ash-Sharif narrated again by Zayd bin Erqam, he (Rasulullah) states, "To fight Ali, Fatima, Hasan and Husain, means to fight me. To be in peace with them means to give up one's self to me." Jemi' bin 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh' relates: My (paternal) uncle and I asked Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' who Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had loved best. "(He loved) Fatima 'radi- allahu anha' (best)," she answered. When we asked who the man he had loved best was, she said it was Fatima's husband. Abdullah ibni 'Umar 'radi-allahu anh', [Hendek (Trench) was the first Holy War he joined; he joined all the other Holy Wars. He passed away in Mecca in 73 (H.), when he was eighty-four years old], quotes Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' as saying, "Hasan and Husain are my fragrant odors in the world". Ali 'radi- allahu anh' stated: "The upper part of Hasan's body and the lower part of Husain's body resembled those of Rasulullah's, respectively." Abdullah ibni Abbas 'radi-allahu anhuma', [was very profoundly erudite. He passed away in Taif in 68 (H.), when he was seventy years old.], relates: Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' had Hasan on his blessed shoulder. Someone (who saw them) said, "O Hasan! What a good place you have seated yourself." Upon this the Messenger of Allah said, "What a good person is the one on my shoulder!" According to a narrative reported from Aisha 'radi-allahu anha', [daughter of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq. Upon the command of Allahu ta'ala she was married to our master, Rasulullah, through nikah (marriage contract as prescribed by Islam) when she was six years old, and the wedding ceremony was held in the first year of Hijrat, when she was nine. She was praised and lauded (by Allahu ta'ala) in Qur'an al-karim. She was learned, literary, very wise, and masterly skilled. She reported more than a thousand hadith ash- Sharifs. She was eighteen years old when Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' passed away. She passed away in Medina in 57 (H.), when she was sixty-five years old. She was Abdullah bin Zubair's maternal aunt]: the Ashab al-kiram would race for attaining Rasulullah's love; for instance, they would bring him their presents when he was in Aisha's home. There were two groups of the (blessed) wives. Hafsa, Safiyya, and Sawda were with Aisha. The second group were Umm-i-Salama and others. This group sent Umm-i- Salama to Rasulullah with the request, "Please command your Ashab that anyone who would like to give you a present should take it to the home of the wife you happen to be with!" Upon this, Rasulullah stated, "Do not hurt me about Aisha! Only when I was with her did Jabrail (Gabriel, the Archangel) 'alaihis-salam' visit me." Sorry about what she had said, Umm-i-Salama made tawba and begged for forgiveness. But the wives sent Fatima 'radi-allahu ta'ala anhunna' with the same request. The (Prophet's) answer was: "O my daughter! Will you not love whom I love?" When Fatima answered, "Of course, I will," Rasulullah said, "Then, love Aisha!" Aisha 'radi-allahu anha' related, "Among Rasulullah's wives, Hadija (Hadija-t-ul-kubra, Rasulullah's first blessed wife. Our Prophet did not marry another woman as long as she lived. She was forty years old when she married the Messenger of Allah, who was twenty-five then. She passed away in Mecca, in the blessed month of Ramadan, three years before the Hijrat (the Prophet's migration to Medina). It was one year after her passing away that Allahu ta'ala commanded His beloved Messenger to "marry (hadrat) Aisha.") 'radi-allahu anha' was the one I envied most and wished I had been in her place, though I had never seen her. For, dead as she was, he mentioned her name very frequently. Whenever he killed a sheep and dealt out the meat, he would make sure that a certain amount (of meat) be reserved and would send it to Hadija's relatives. On one such occasion I said to him, 'Why do you mention Hadija's name so often as though Allahu ta'ala had given you no other women?' He answered, 'Yes, I did have other women. Yet she was so good, so... , (He praised Hadija for a while, and added), and I had children through her.' " Abdullah ibni Abbas quoted Rasulullah as having said, "Abbas is from me, and I am from Abbas." [Abbas 'radi-allahu anh' was a slave captured in the (Holy War) Badr. Later he became a Muslim. He joined the Holy Wars of Mecca and Hunayn. He was tall, light-complexioned, and very handsome. He passed away in 32, when he was eighty-eight years old. He is in Baqi, Medina]. Another hadith ash-Sharif reported by Abdullah declares, "Love Allahu ta'ala, who sends you plenty of His blessings. As you love Allahu ta'ala, love me, too. As you love me, love my Ahl al-bayt!" Abu Zer Ghifari, [the fifth earliest Muslim. He passed away in Rabda village of Medina in 32], quoted Rasulullah 'sall-allahu alaihi wa sallam' as having stated, "Be it known that my Ahl al-bayt among you is like Nuh's (Noah's) 'alaihis-salam' Ark. As those who boarded the Ark (at that time) attained salvation, so any person who loves my Ahl al-bayt (now and on) shall attain salvation. And he who turns away from them shall end up in destruction."

This is the end of the book Radd-i-Rawafid, by Imam-i-Rabbani, mujaddid-i-alf-i-Thani Ahmad Faruqi 'rahmat-ullahi alaih".

Ilahi! (O my Allah!) For the sake of Fatima's children, Make my last word the Kalima,i- tawhid! (The word expressing that Allahu ta'ala exists and is one: La ilaha il-l-allah.)) Shouldst Thou reject or accept my invocation, I've held on to the skirts of Ahl al-bayt-i- Nabi.

Ya Rabbi (o my Allah)! For the sake of Thine Prophet and his Ahl al-bayt 'radi- allahu anhum', forgive Imam-i-Rabbani Ahmad Faruqi and his mother and father! For the sake of the beautiful character of Thine Beloved one, treat them well and beautifully 'rahmatullahi alaihim ajmain'! Make our dua and salam reach Thine Beloved Prophet and his Ahl al-bayt, and give them khayr and barakat in a manner as Thou likest, as many times as the number of Thine creatures and as heavy as Thine Arsh. Amin. May hamd (praise, laud, and thanks) be to Allahu ta'ala, and may duas and salams be to the ummi Prophet, Muhammad 'alaihis-salam', till the end of the world!

The book (Radd-i-Rawafid), by hadrat Imam-i-Rabbani Ahmad Faruqi Sarhandi, was printed in India and Pakistan. Ghulam Mustafa Khan, a professor in the university of Haydarabad, Pakistan, had it printed in a splendid layout and published it together with its Urdu translation under the title (Ta'yid-i-Ahl-i-sunnat) in 1385 [C.E. 1965]. This edition of the book was reproduced by offset process in Istanbul in 1397 [C.E. 1977]. The book was translated into Arabic by Shah Waliy-y-ullah Dahlawi, an Indian scholar, and the translation was printed in India. This Arabic version was reproduced by offset process in Istanbul and published as an appendix to the book An-Nahiya.

No one do I complain to but what I lament over my state;
Trembling like a culprit, as I look into my future state!