Home » Islam » Islamic Philosophy » Concept of Authority in Islam
   About Us
   Islamic Sites
   Special Occasions
   Audio Channel
   Weather (Mashhad)
   Islamic World News Sites
   Yellow Pages (Mashhad)
   Souvenir Album

Concept of Authority in Islam

Ahmad Husain Yaqub

It has been conspicuous that the entire Sahaba's ultimate decency conception did create a factual authority that installed seeable effects on jurisprudential and political life of Islam. This authority occupied the position of the doctrinal one defined by God and explicated by the Prophet of God, owing to ordinary transmission and imitation. The doctrinal authority, because of policy of oversight and propounding the surrogate one, became unfamiliar to the degree that some people conjectured his illegality. They saw the surrogate one as the legitimate.
For providing a distinct exhibition of legal facts of the legitimate doctrinal authority, we are to allocate a specific title for this purpose.

Authority is that body whose mission is explicating judgments, as well as rulings, of the divine Islamic doctrine. Such an explication must not be attained by supposition and conjecture. It must be attained by such a way of certitude and conviction that it must be identical to the divine intendment. Applying so, the believers will be accepting this explication of the doctrinal authority as an intellectual or invariable fact that can be taken as a conceptional base or a path upon which ideas are structured or march is commenced. In his lifetime, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is the authority of the Muslims to whom they refer in the doctrinal affairs, and whose words are the decisive judgment since he is believed as the most knowledgeable of the doctrinal rulings. After the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), the head of his household -the imam- is the authority regarding his most knowledgeability of the doctrinal affairs. This is the Shias' conception. The Prophet's companions, individually and congregationally, are representing the reference of explicating the divine doctrine after the Prophet's decease. They are entirely decent. Each individual of them is decent. They are the eternal occupants of the Paradise. They are the witnesses who conveyed this religion to us. For all of these qualifications, the Sahaba are the legitimate authority. Hence, it is a matter of fact that pursuing any of such individuals shall inevitably lead to the right path. The ruler is the legitimate authority in the absence of the Sahaba. He is having the right of scrutinizing the various ideas and conclusions to opt for what he tends. These ideas and conclusions are the previous questions provided in the time of the Sahaba. The ruler, whoever he was, is the legitimate authority since the Muslims should stand in the line of the prevailing in any case. This opinion is familiarly ascribed to Abdullah Bin Omar, the famous Sahabi. Sunnis adopted this opinion. The dominant, hence, is the authority who has the right to elicit verdicts even if he is not qualified enough to derive rulings. He also has the license of opting for any opinion of any mujtahid -having the talent of inferring verdicts and rulings from the defined sources of legislation- lacking or having the authority of legislation.

There is a correlative relation and cohesion between the authority and the doctrine. The authority infers the rulings from the doctrine. No doctrine exists without an authority, and no authority exists without a doctrine. The essential chore of the authority is demonstrating the divine belief. The prophet, followed by the authority, substantiates the very intendment of Allah, the Exalted. The divine doctrine determined the boundaries of the words, deeds, goals and means of attaining these goals. Also, the divine doctrine constituted the relationship between the believers and their doctrine in all levels. Thus, the role of the authority is restricted in elucidating the doctrine thoroughly and typifying it with the novel eventualities.
The authority is the only responsible of transferring the texts, rulings and purposes of the doctrine from hypothesis into application. In other words, the authority is the one in charge of applying words on levels of solicitation and administration. In this regard, the Prophet's presentation of the divine doctrine is a part of that doctrine and reckoned with the numerous contents of it. While the presentation of Ali, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussein, Zeinul-Abidin, Ja'far As-Sadiq or any other imam is seen as one of the constitutional precedents that are necessary for those who propose to make their deeds coincide with the divine intendment. Hence, the presentation of the authorities succeeding the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is not reckoned as a part of the doctrine. However, such a presentation is obligatory upon the individual believing in the legitimacy of that individual's authority. Doctrinally, it is illicit to contravene the legitimate imam who represents the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Thus, compliance to this authority is accounted as same as compliance to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).

The like of doctrine is a ship the captain of which is the authority. It is essential charts of divine proposition of salvation. The authority is the engineer in charge of managing, explaining, interpreting and materializing the process of planning this proposition objectively and ideologically. The authority, however, is the instructor of establishment. Logically, it is insane to prepare the raw materials of that institution before seeking the advisory of the instructor and the engineer. Regarding the Islamic doctrine, the authority must be the most knowledgeable of this doctrine, the most reliable, the most confident of Allah, the most honorable and the fittest for leadership and authority. The authority is the arbiter and the spokesman of the divine judgment. It is inevitable that the authority is the adopter of judgments identical to the divine intendment.

In a single divine doctrine, there is always a single authority. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), hence, is the most regardable authority of Islam. In his time, Moses, the prophet, was the most regardable authority. In case Moses is absent, Aaron becomes the authority related and following Moses. When both are attendant, Moses is the authority. The same thing is said about Jesus. He is the authority in affairs appertained to Christianity. In reality, variety of authorities results in disintegration of the doctrine, dissipation of its disciples and extricating of false authorities.
In Islam, the authority is one and only. It is a matter of specialization and one of the most significant exigencies. In the absence of the doctrinal legitimate authority, every individual or group of Muslims take their own way believing their only rightfulness. This occurs because of frequent practices of erroneous matters. This will certainly be leading to engagement in discrepancies and a dispersal too diffusive to be re accumulated except when there is a single authority whose word is regarded as a conventional and intellectual reality accepted collectively with full satisfaction. This is the solitary method of uniting the Muslims.

It is the same difference between solicitation and its crier. Mohammedan solicitation is relying upon two things; the Quran and the Prophet's traditions; words, deeds and signature. This is a property of Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family). The doctrine is the Holy Quran and its explication; the Prophet's words, deeds and signature. This is by the consideration that the explicator -the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)- is a coherent part of the doctrine. Similarly, confiding and committing to the Prophet, and submitting to the authenticity of his understanding the religion, is a coherent part of the doctrine. On this account, the Prophet's words are decisive in all manners, since he is the most knowledgeable and familiar with this doctrine. In addition, he is the most favorable and the fittest to leadership.
Thereafter, the religion was perfected and the divine grace was consummate. The Quran left no single thing without explanation before the Prophet was transmitted to His Lord's neighbor. The doctrine, represented by the Holy Quran and the Prophet's words, deeds and signature, was left among us. The authority is a matter of another concern. That authority’s mission is explicating the divine doctrine and harmonizing it with the current mundane circumstances.
Manifesting this idea, we say: the doctrine is a ship the captain of which is the authority. It is the general and detailed charts of a scheme the engineer of which is the authority who is completely familiar with such charts. It is the raw materials needed for constructing the anticipated edifice, and the authority is that expert of construction. It is an ideational structure or, in other words, an idiosyncratic virtual entity, while the authority is the expresser of the attitudes of that virtual entity towards objective issues. It is not unacceptable to say that the doctrine is that large pharmacy containing remedy of every ailment. The authority is the physician whose mission is diagnosing the malady and prescribing the curative treatment positively found at that large pharmacy; the doctrine.

Granting that God compulsorily reveals doing good to a human or designates a special angel for directing to the good, a human shall not be meriting the rewards of conducting good since he has been coerced on doing. There is only one matter becoming the divine abstraction of testing. This matter is God's granting mankind the capability of discerning right from wrong, as well as the capability of conducting the right and the wrong after these two things are shown manifestly to him. Next to discriminating the good from the bad and revealing what is licit or permissible, God awards mankind the freedom of doing good or evil fully satisfactorily and optionally. Only after that, mandatory individuals deserve the reward or the penalty of opting for good or evil.
The previous is the ground upon which the idea of messaging divine epistles to mankind is based. Regarding it as one of the essences of explicating the divine epistles, the idea of finding an authority was also originated on the same ground.
The idea of the divine epistles is going around two main pivots:
1. A messenger having the qualifications of conveying the divine message. This messenger is surmised as the earthy authority of that message.
2. A message with episodes too impracticable to be conveyed apart from a messenger or an authority. This message is set by Allah to be taken as the proposal of the divine guidance. Allah, the Exalted, is the supreme source to Whom messengers refer in matters appertained to the message.
The first step of revealing a divine missive to mankind is selecting a messenger or an authority. The second is teaching the elected messenger the contents of that divine message; that is to mean the doctrine. The third is the messenger's efforts of conveying and explicating the message adequately to people involved, and surveying their verbal response. This is for the purpose that that messenger will be the witness on such people. As being considered as the authority who has full and thorough acquaintance of the divine message, the messenger is referred to in questions appertained. He refers to Allah in questions involved when he becomes in need of further explication. This is a truth so resolute that except the ignorant, none would dispute about.
All the time, the messenger is the authority whose mission is explaining and divulging the message contents and methods of applying such contents effectively in a way attaining God's acknowledgment.
In case of the messenger's decease, the doctrine is endurable as long as there are followers. Similarly, there must be an authority for playing the role of the explicator and witness. This matter is one of the essences of divine messages. For rehearsing the process of divine testing, it is imperative that there is only one authority for the one doctrine for leading the march of caravan of faith whether it was on the level of preliminary solicitation or government in case the authority could achieve the process of developing a preliminary solicitation into a governmental administration.

In an essay published in Al-Liwa, the Jordanian journal, issue: 955, dated: 17 / Safar / 1412 A.H., I recorded the following:
It is not unfamiliar for the Arab political parties that the divine epistles addressed at mankind have been ceaseless all over history. We, hereby, are to ask those honorable political parties to show us whether there had ever been a divine epistle sent without a human medium; a messenger? They are to search in the history of the globe as a whole, beginning with Adam and ending with Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family). Proving their lack to provide any evidence, it is the proper time for them to admit the fact that they had been engaged in partisan imitation and it is, also, the proper time for them to shun that imitation and take God in consideration during proceeding any further step concerning their religion, nation as well as mankind as a whole, who attach great expectations to their religion for being the ultimate savior of this globe which is the means of transferring humankind from claws of disgusting materiality into the large phase of divine compatibility of events and rulings.
The Islamic doctrine has an authority; God's Apostle (peace be upon him and his family). This doctrine pointed out the authority succeeding the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). This is for the essential role of authority in the life.
Any family and government have an authority. This is by the reason that the authority is a principal element of any advocacy, association of individuals, doctrine and state. The gist of misfortunes the Muslims have been encountering is their banishing the doctrinal authority assigned by Allah, and clinging to the surrogate one imposed by the prevailing powers and humiliatingly concurred by people owing to their partisan pursuance.


The relation between doctrine and authority is interdependent. The existence of an authority is fundamentally actual whenever there is a doctrine. Contemporaneity and reciprocal perfection between doctrine and authority are necessarily existent. For focusing thorough light on the meaning of authority, it is important to study the signification of doctrine since it is infeasible to understand one without having an adequate intimacy with the other.
What is the sense of doctrine? Generally, a doctrine implies the mass of correlate and perfect ideas, rules, principals and values that are contributing in providing a picture of the past, present and expected or sought future of the being, disregarding genuineness, comprehensiveness and perfection of this picture. A definite group of people will be unquestionably attracted to that doctrine as they have been convinced of the picture provided. Pursuant to criteria of that doctrine, the group involved determine their concepts, goals and ways taken for attaining these goals. From this cause, the doctrine is being the leader, director and source of the advantage and legislation of that group's life.
Any doctrine, in this aspect, naturally claims of its aptitude to administrate the followers' life, render convalescent solutions for their problems, and promote to a bright morrow. In addition, such a doctrine claims of owning means of meting out prosperity among the embracers. Such claims can make considerable mental and physical vibrations in the embacers’ spirits until they advance the doctrine as a political school ready for evidencing claims through influential individuals taking the charge of authority and planning policies of that group in respect of concepts of the doctrine. The political school is same as the perfect political schedule produced by the doctrine. It is a declaration of that doctrine's facilitative ideology, philosophy and principals so that they can be readily applied and experienced. Besides, the political schedule provided by a doctrine highlights on the goals and their achieving means. All the above is practically connected with the existence of a governmental or ruling authority whose main task is applying this schedule on actuality. In this regard, we can look upon the emancipating Capitalism and the Communist Marxism as doctrines.

Mankind knew only two categories of doctrines:
1. Divine doctrines created by God.
2. Positive doctrines counted, or accumulated, by one or more individuals.

A deep view in the subject of doctrines makes us discover the fact that it is possible for any human to conceive any doctrine whether good or evil. But it is impractical for him to create or even found an ideal doctrine. As a nature, humans are unqualified to establishing such an ideal doctrine. Moreover, it is quite moderate to admit the fact that it is unattainable for the entire human beings to create a single convictional ideal doctrine even if they were proceeding in the same level. Yet; it is fictitious and impossible to propose that people will be on practicing on the same level one day. This takes us to the certitude that instituting an ideal doctrine is a matter exceeding ordinary levels and capacities of this life. This is because that such a concern requires, as a pillar part, a dogmatic knowledge of mankind's past and their detailed experiences. Besides, it requires a categorical knowledge of man's nature, exigencies, motives, trends and future. Future, as a factor of time, is the singular element that shows the fruition or the abortion of any doctrine. Finally, instituting an ideal doctrine requires a conservative knowledge of the universe surrounding mankind. These sorts of knowledge, as a conclusion, are impossibly attained by any individual, group or even the entire mankind.
Sooner or later, positive doctrines shall be, beyond any dispute, collapsed. This is for the elementary reason that humankind are naturally unqualified enough to institute a doctrine. The dogmatic doctrine that is appropriate to be perpetual ground of authority is the one created by Allah, the Creator. This is the Islamic doctrine which was actually representing premise of the state governed by Mohammed the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).

1. Practically; Islam stands for perfect compliance to Allah, the Elevated, in every mundane or celestial affair. This can be achieved by submitting and directing conducts of the Islamic state, including individuals and groups on the entire levels, to the criteria of the divine commands defined by the persuasive divine message (the doctrine), which is Islam, towards carrying through the doctrinal goals. Conducts, in this regard, consents to the practices bowed to the doctrinal ideal and intendment.
2. Hypothetically; the Islamic doctrine betokens group of rulings, judgments, principals and matters to be enjoined and others to be avoided in addition to the general and detailed instructions revealed by God, the Exalted, to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). He (peace be upon him and his family) did explain and call for those things hypothetically through his solicitation or the government he founded. Eventually, those matters were put into application by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) himself through the solicitation and the government.
Hence, the doctrine comprises God’s revealed matters and the Prophet’s deeds, words and signature. This role of the doctrine, as a perfected body, is answering wonderments regarding existence, incentives, termination, its way and the outcome of life. It also regulates the relations between the creatures themselves and the relations between their Creator and them and the universe and them. This universe is essential for the existence of those creatures and, in the same time, submitted for serving them. Other roles of the doctrine are showing ways of the termination of the whole permanence and that of each individual's life. It reveals the being of another life which is as same as a court evaluating deeds of all of those who passed through circle of the world. In other words, it is the end result due to which each shall be rewarded or penalized so fairly.
This doctrine is a fully occupied record of the entire creatures’ history, especially mankind. In this record, the total experiments are banked so genuinely and objectively that an artistic depiction showing absolute audible, visual, mobile, outward and clandestine views and scenes.
The doctrine, likewise, is the system of individuals, societies, authorities and mankind in general. It rectifies the life of each individual solitarily, relations between individuals, their relations with their Creator and their relations with the world encompassing them. Those individuals is supported by advocacy of that doctrine. The advocacy is supported by establishing a government. The government is supported by goals and supreme ideality.
This doctrine is purposeful. It has the capacity of determining its goals. There is a purpose for each rulings decided. This ruling is originally decided and issued for that very purpose. Similarly, there are goals beyond the existence of individuals, societies, authorities and mankind as a whole. All of these goals are moving to the same place, which is the exact general goal of Islam. Goals involved are circumscribed and standardized in such a way that they deliberately reflect the scope of energies, without redundancy or blemish, latent in substances of individuals, societies, authorities and mankind as a whole. In a like fashion, the goals reflect the energies of beings enclosing the mankind and submitted to their ministration. Things do not possess but their energies. Besides goals determined by the Islamic doctrine, means, methods and ways of achieving and clarifying these goals are devised so patently that any mystification is unmistakably removed.

Islam, as a doctrine, provides an unequivocal, complete and comprehensive depiction based upon concluding and certitude. This dogmatic depiction covers the entire area of goals and general and specific means in the total fields of life and on the total individual, social, political, economical and international levels…etc. It is the accurate general and detailed outlines of factuality of the present and the expected and sought future, which is anticipated to be an actual fact, of events. These outlines are anticipated to leading individuals gradually to the doctrinal purpose using the shortest, the cheapest and the broadest way. Only then, the doctrine becomes the leader and the director besides its becoming the source of legality that is resolved as a perfect ideological structure. Self-contentment and satisfaction, when attained by conviction and certitude, are the sustainers of such a structure. Positive beliefs, on the other hand, are attained on grounds of conjecture and surmise; therefore, they, sooner or later, shall be collapsing.

The Islamic doctrine betokens the group of rulings, judgments, principals, matters to be enjoined and those to be avoided in addition to the general and detailed instructions revealed by God, the Exalted, to his Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) did explain and call for those things hypothetically through his solicitation or the government he founded. The revealer is Allah, and the explainer is God's messenger. The media of explanation were the Prophet's words, deeds and signature. Revelation and explanation are forming the divine jurisprudential formulation which stands as the law effective and valid in every time. The doctrinal authority is the director and the tutor of the followers of this doctrine after the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).


As we have previously mentioned, it is necessary that each doctrine has a legitimate authority being coherent and perfecting that doctrine. It is unrealizable to find a divine doctrine without an authority in charge of explicating it. Indispensably, this authority must be the most knowledgeable, familiar and sincere to the doctrine. In the same manner, the authority must be the most favorable and the fittest for the position. These qualifications should be realized by conviction and certitude, apart from conjecture and surmise. These matters, in fact, can be comprehended by Allah exclusively considering Him as the Knowing of the hiddens as well as the appearances. This is the base on which God is the only One Who is in charge of selecting and nominating the authority. This is an indisputable truth.
The Divine Custody declared availability of these qualifications in the prophets whom were elected by God alone all over the mankind history, disregarding any objection such like those who said: (Why was not this Quran revealed to a man of importance in the two towns?) or those who objected and described the prophet as (This fellow, who is contemptible, and who can hardly speak distinctly.) Since such a sort of objection is originated from conjecture and surmise, while the divine selection of prophets is arisen from conviction and absolute certitude of their being the most knowledgeable, familiar, sincere, favorable, honorable and fittest for explicating the divine doctrine and leading the ship and the followers of Islam, these objections were neglected.
Briefly, Allah, the Exalted, is the only Competent to decide the authorities whose mission is conveying the divine doctrine all over the mankind history. He, exclusively, does realize the most eligible for conveying such beliefs. It has never happened that God left choice for people in the matter of electing the prophets.

It is an indisputable that the entire honorable prophets are authorities assigned by Allah Who informed us of this election. We are, here, to show the missions and functions those authorities were to practice.
1. Explication: A perfect hypothetical and practical explication and clarification of the divine doctrines is one of the most important missions of prophets. This is proceeded by a solicitation leading to establishing a government, such as what was achieved by Islam and his Prophet, Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family). For many prophets, their solicitation did not lead to establishing a government. The authority's mission is a hypothetical explication of the divine doctrine as exactly as he has received from God. This step is followed by applying that doctrine in the society. Thus, the explication should be hypothetically and practically perfect. Adopting the very divine means of application, the prophet applies the doctrinal texts on the events. This assures the materialization of goals of the divine texts in every occurrence involved.
2. Defining the circle of legality: the authority -the prophet- is enjoying an exclusive competency of defining limits of the circle of legality. For every prophet, these limits are:
a. A divine doctrine forming the center of circle of legality. This doctrine is the divine manifestations whether in a form of enunciation and meaning, such as the Torah and the Bible, or meaning such as the divine denotations.
b. The prophet's explaining the divine doctrine hypothetically and practically.
c. Interdependence of the doctrine and the authority's explanations. It is inapplicable to separate one from the other. In other words, the divine doctrine and the authority's explanations are two faces of the same coin. It is impossible to understand the doctrine without referring to the authority's explanations, and it is also impossible to comprehend the authority's explanations without referring to the basic texts. The base, here, is God's revelation and structure of guidance. Explanations are the doors to this structure.
3. Responsibility for the followers: The prophet's being custodian and leader of the doctrine followers is one of his missions. He is to direct the followers' affairs and escort them with respect to the divine doctrine. Practically, this side was obviously noticed. Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family), the doctrinal authority, was the custodian and the leader of his followers during his lifetime. Intellectually and jurisdictionally, custody of the authority is religiously implementable and timed mission. It was the same person who led the solicitation and the government established on that solicitation. It was the same person who explained and applied the doctrine.
4. Standing against conditions of deviation: With the expedience of the two following pillars, guidance to the right path and disappearance of deviation are achieved in the reign of the authoritative prophet:
a. A creedal and jurisprudential pillar, which is following rulings of the divine doctrine (the divine jurisprudential formulation) and the prophet's explanations of that doctrine.
b. A personal pillar, which is custody and leadership of the prophet selected for authority. This is applied by the prophet's politicizing his followers and applying the doctrine to them in the exact understanding and figure he has received from Allah. For assuring the predominance of legality and guidance -to the right path-, it is essential to retain the unification of these two pillars. Deviation shall be the inevitable result if any practical error occurs in both or one of these. The personal pillar is of the same value of the creedal. Both form a unique characteristic. It is unfeasible to believe in the divine doctrine and reject Mohammed's leadership, since it is regarded as an inseparable part of that doctrine. Deviation is engaged whenever an endeavor of segregating the personal pillar from the creedal is practiced. Size of deviation is determined according to the size of the endeavor of segregation.
5. The ship of safety: The Prophet, the authority, is the only ship of safety. they shall be certainly winning those whoever board on that ship; while deviation and drowning shall be the fate of those who eschew or take any other one.
6. The Prophet, the authority is the door to God's forgiveness: God shall forgive those who take that door; while those who neglect shall be shouldering their sins.
7. The Prophet, the authority leads his followers to the right path: Compliance and ensuing the Prophet is as same as compliance and ensuing Allah. Obedience to the Prophet is an obedience to Allah. Obedience to Allah is the right path. Disobeying the Prophet is disobeying Allah. Disobeying Allah is the grievous deviation.
8. The Prophet, the authority is the safety of the faithful nation and the obstacle against discrepancies: The safe way is taken only by following the Prophet, the authority. It is the single way the Prophet had understood and led to before he took. Indisputably, a path taken by the Prophet is completely safe and even. With the absence of this authority, discrepancies will be engaged, safe will be vanished and people will be following any noise and swerving any breath of wind.
The existence of a single authority that ideally recognizes the divine regulations, is decided as a shelter against discrepancies and a source of perpetual safe to the nation.
9. The authority is seen as a weight for the followers that, by adhering to, protects them against collapsing and devastation.
10. The authority is the exemplar in knowledgeability, god-fearing, commitment and judging: He is the mobile model of a godly individual who clings to the divine doctrine.
11. Condensing efforts and coordinating faithful activities for the sake of generalizing guidance to the right path all over mankind.

Obedience to God is well attained by complying to the matters He ordered of and avoiding the matters He forbade. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) is the most familiar with the essentialities of matters to be pursued and those neglected. Practically, obedience to the Prophet is obedience to God and defiance to the Prophet is defiance to God. This fact is repeated nine times in the Holy Quran. The Prophet is the custodian of this religion. He is the well knowledgeable of its hiddens and secrets. He is the only one who has the capability of outlining the general rulings of the doctrine and explicating the exact intended signification in case there are numerous messages of a certain text. In brief words, the Prophet, in his reign, was the only one to whom the doctrinal authority is restricted. He is the one selected for this mission and granted the perfection by Allah. None can recognize God's mandates and orders so excellently like the Prophet who is unique and, hence, must be the most knowledgeable, the most familiar and the most honorable so that his followers should hold to thoroughly. None can contrast the doctrinal and intellectual fact that, during his lifetime, the Prophet had been the authority specialized in explicating Islam and leading Muslims.


An undeniable fact is that just before the Prophet's being taken to the Elevated Associate, the religion was perfected and the grace was completed. Besides, creeds were grounded, rulings were applied and the government established and headed by the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was dominant for ten years.
As to the Islam's being the final religion, the peculiarities of its rulings that are radically general and comprehensive, and the nature of the task to be shouldered by the Muslims, which is reducing the area of atheism and guiding mankind to the right path, there must be originally an authority after the Prophet's decease. This is a matter too intrinsic to require an evidence if there was no existence to partisan imitation, submission to actuality and most people's nature of compliance to the dominant.
Some, including the Arab religious parties, would claim that the Muslims' scholars are the authorities according to the meaning we are referring to. The caliph, consequently, will be the supreme authority. As an answer, we provide the following:
The earlier saying is impracticable. We ask what should the situation be if the entire Muslim scholars, assuming they are gathered in the same place, were involved in various numerous parties each of whom is acceptably supporting and insisting on their own viewpoints that are relying upon a seemingly legitimate argument? Which party should we follow, and which viewpoint should we consider? The Arab religious parties may answer that the ruler must adopt the viewpoint that he regards as the fittest. So, they do admit that the most supreme authority is the ruler as considered as the Prophet's successor! Nevertheless, it is well known that a many men did come to power in different ways. Some, like Ali and Abu Bakr, were god-fearing. Others, like Marwan Bin Al-Hakam, Muawiya Bin Abi Sufian and Yazeed, his son, were not. Some came to power in legitimate way; while others were the rulers as they became the most prevalent, and people, compulsorily, submitted to their rule. Marwan, for example, was not knowledgeable and he was illegible to opt for the most becoming judgment.

As it has been previously proved, every prophet is necessarily an authority on whose shoulders many responsibilities and functions are settled by God, the Elevated. The ultimate divine solicitation undertaken by Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family), the master and seal of prophets, was so successful that it resulted in the establishment of a government that completely and flawlessly applied the hypothetical and practical rules of the divine doctrine. Hence, God declared that the Muslims' religion was completed and the grace was thoroughly perfected. As he was granted the choice, the Prophet opted for God's contiguity. He was not surprised by decease. He was sickened and taken to His Lord's vicinity leaving behind him the divine advocacy straight and represented by an ideal government and an exalted religion. It was indeed an explication of everything at all.
Who should be the successive authority? Who should undertake the missions he had been in charge of? Who should clarify rules of the divine doctrine after him? Who should have authorization of defining circle of legality? Who should be the leader of the nation and the representative pillar of their glory? Who should be the ship of safety? Who should be the door to forgiveness? Who should be the trustee savior of this nation? Who should be people's weighty thing? Who should be the supreme epitome after the Prophet? Who should be the leader of the believers' march towards manumitting and taking mankind from darkness into illumination?

Supposing the Muslims claimed that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had not nominated the successive authority whose assignment would be undertaking missions, explaining rules of the doctrine and defining circle of legality, the new leader of the nation, the representative pillar of the nation's glory, the weighty thing, the supreme epitome and the commander of battle of manumitting and saving mankind. If the Muslims claimed so, then this would be contrary to the fact of perfecting the religion and supplementing the divine grace. This is by the reason that the previous affairs are pillar parts of the religion and the divine grace that are impossibly suspended. In case the Muslims insist on this claim, they would certainly see that the divine doctrine challenge, denounce and rebuff their allegations contrary to logic, intellect and bases of life in addition to rules of the divine doctrine.
Regarding the authority succeeding the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), Muslims were engaged in two main parties each of whom is claiming following the manifest right.
1. The historicists: This term is called upon those who justified and legalized the total occurrences of the political history of Islam, eminently the reign of Rashidite caliphate. They are known as ‘Ahlus-Sunneh.’ This term was originated in the Umayid reign and, markedly, in Muawiya's, when power overcame legality and survival became for the strongest who could submit majority of people to his domination. Thence, this year was called ‘year of congruity’, and the party who followed the prevailing force was called ‘the congruous.’ They are, in fact, the ruling party. They are, although disagreeing to the ruling regime in some situations, loyal to the Umayids who possessed the riches banned to those who stood against the ruling regime. Ahlus-Sunneh, however, looked at the Umayids as an emblem of the Muslims' unity.
2. The Shariites: They are, in various proportions, the party that opposed and decided illegality of occurrences of the political history of Islam. Proportionally, the Rashidite caliphate is considered as a golden reign if balanced with the Umayid. Moreover, there is no single face of comparison between the two. The Abbasid caliphate was worse than the Umayid.
The Shariites see that the divine doctrine did nominate the authority after the Prophet, and that God did not leave this affair for personal impressions. They believe that God did elect an authority and granted him the authorization of joining leadership to issuing judgments. The defined authority after the Prophet is Ali Bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him). According to arrangements of the doctrine, each authority is to nominate the successor. The adopters of such a belief is known as ‘Shia.’ Since the time of the Prophet, Shism was instituted. They are the opposition party all over history. At all the reigns, especially the Umayid and the Abbasid, Shias were chased, banished, banned from their basic rights, inadmitted as testifiers, disavowed as beneficiaries of the state imports and cursed forever.
Below, both parties' opinion and argument of the authority after the Prophet shall be respectively debated.
Sunnis allege that the Prophet left his nation without nominating a successor or an authority. That is to mean that he did not indicate to an imam or a leader whom should succeed him in undertaking the political and the religious affairs of the state. They referred to Omar's replying those who commended him to nominate a definite successor, as their evidence on the Prophet's leaving his nation without nomination. Omar, the caliph, said: “Should I name someone, this matter had been done by that who was more honorable than me -Abu Bakr-. Should I neglect so, this negligence had been practiced by that who was more honorable than me -the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family.)-”
The Prophet, they claim, had never willed to anybody to undertake his mundane and godly affairs, including authority. They referred to Ummul-Mu'minin, A'isheh, as an evidence on their claim. A'isheh alleged that the Prophet had died while he was put between her neck and breast, and his head was on her thigh. She would have certainly heard him had he willed of anything. Thence, depending on Ummul-Mu'minin's previous claim, Al-Bukhari and Muslim denied the allegation of the Prophet's will.
Pursuant to their opinion, too, had the Prophet definitely nominated somebody in his will, as his successor, Ali Bin Abi Talib would never have been the one intended, as Shias allege. This is by the reason that had Ali been the one intended, the virtuous Sahaba would most surely not have disdained this will and elected someone else. This is arisen from the fact that the Sahaba, as a whole, are decent. He whoever bears any doubt about the order of the caliphs (Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman and Ali respectively), is debasing about twelve thousand Sahaba.
Briefly, the Prophet did leave the affair of leading and ruling the Muslims for themselves considering it as an affair of their own concern. Necessarily Imamate and authorization are adjacent to headship of the Islamic government.

Later on, Sunnis perceive that the ever most menacing matter that threatens the existence of the Islamic state is the current leader's neglecting nominating a successor. They also descry that assigning a successor is a concern resulting in the benefit of Muslims and Islam.
Let's take a view on the following incident. A'isheh addressed at Abdullah, the son of Omar Bin Al-Khattaab: “O son! After carrying my greetings to Omar, tell him that he should never leave Mohammed's nation without a guide. He should nominate a successor, lest, they shall be dispersed. I anticipate that they shall be engaged in seditious matters.” Abdullah carried Ummul-Mu'minin's message to his father.
Ummul-Mu'minin was quite true; leaving the nation without nominating a guide or an authority is a matter leading to the arising of seditious disadvantages and the dispersion of people.
Abdullah, the son, paid thorough intention to this point. While his father was dying, he stood before him and said: “O Ameerul-Mu'minin! Nominate a successor for leading Mohammed's nation! You should certainly reproach the supervisor of your camels or sheep if he left the animals without appointing a supervisor as his representative. You would blame him for missing his depository. How would you, Ameerul-Mu'minin, then do it with Mohammed's nation?” Al-Faruq, however, provided the same reply: “Should I name, this matter had been done by that who was more honorable than me -Abu Bakr-. Should I neglect so, this negligence had been practiced by that who was more honorable than me -the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family.)-”
The process of the Prophet's leaving his nation without nominating a successor was settled by innovation of the procedure so-called the heir apparent of leadership. This procedure is practiced by the current leader's nominating a person, disregarding distinct qualifications and characteristics, as his heir apparent; that is to mean the successor. This is established for the reason that the current leader, imam, caliph or president, disregarding legality or the way by which he had come to power, is the actual custodian and supervisor of the nation and, in addition, he is the only one who has full acquaintance of the convenience of the state he is ruling. Therefore, he is the most familiar with the future of his state. People, consequently, should accede and trust the one he is to appoint in the same amount of confidence they had already provided for the previous. This procedure was jurisprudentially called the nation's congruity. It was, first, processed by Abu Bakr when he appointed Omar as his successor. The same was processed by Omar when he founded the six-member advisory board.
The heir apparent was enacted as a law. Origin of this process was Abu Bakr's nominating Omar, and the Sahaba's showing no objection that it was seen as the outcome of congruity. For Ibn Khuldoun, congruity is measured as a lawful certificate defined for the benefit of unificating Muslims, getting rid of seditious concerns, evading keeping Mohammed's nation dispersed with no supervisor, as A'isheh, Ummul-Mu'minin expressed, and evading any reproach as Abdullah Bin Omar expressed.
According to Sunnis’ opinion, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) was the only leader who had not nominated a successor. On the contrary of other leaders and presidents of the Islamic states who could conceive the Muslims' advantages in their life as well as after their death, the Prophet, pursuant to Ibn Khuldoun's exposition, saw people only during his lifetime, and he should not forecast their advantage after his decease!
In Abstract, after a long period of suffering, the virtuous Sahaba could perceive the fact that it is an inescapable collapsing to leave the nation without referring to the coming leader, imam or authority. They also perceive that nominating a successor, by a will or conventionally, is a matter flowing in the advantage of the Muslims. Thenceforth, they enacted the law of appointing an heir apparent.
A more important matter is that the divine Islamic doctrine has shown everything mentioned in detail or generally in the Holy Quran or by the Prophet. The religion's being clear of this fundamental question is contrary to perfection of the religion and completion of the divine grace. This is emphasized by the fact that the Prophet had opted for his departure and had awareness of his decease during that final disease. God has planted caring for this nation in the Prophet's heart and made him benevolent and merciful to the believers, and let him in on the future of this nation. Is it, then, rational for him to leave the nation without referring to an authority succeeding him? How should a prophet neglect such a serious affair while Abu Bakr, Omar and A'isheh, who are not prophets, treated it? Decisively, this matter is unacceptable and denied by positive doctrinal texts in spite of the estimation of dominant occurrences in that period.
Sunnis adhered to any argument for justifying occurrences. As they were disappointed by the texts, they clung to surmise. When surmise was collapsed, they clasped the advisory board. When that failed, they adduced mercy to the Muslims and keeping their benefits, unity and future so that they would not be scattered like a guideless cattle. After a long period of probing a pretext, they could settle on the principal that the current imam or caliph is to nominate his successor to whom people are to declare loyalty.

The caliph, the imam or the president of the Islamic state is the religious and political authority since he is seen as the Prophet's representative. The caliph undertakes the Prophet's tasks and functions. He estimates the mundane and supernal benefits of the nation. He is the leader and the warden of Muslims in his life and after his decease. He is in charge of assigning the coming leader and the next authority whose responsibility is continuing the current caliph's missions. People should confide this new caliph as they confided the previous one. The caliph enjoys also total privileges and competencies the Prophet had enjoyed on the nation. In our An-Nidhamus-Siyasi Fil-Islam, a whole chapter is debating such competencies. In the same book, the following saying of Dhafir Al-Qasimi recorded in his Nidhamul-Hukm, is written down: “Competencies and privileges of a caliph include the utter internal, external and military affairs. He is the only one on whose shoulders the responsibility of such affairs falls. In case the caliph authorizes some of managing any of these affairs, this should not extinguish his competencies and privileges.”
Al-Mawerdi endeavored to define and proclaim these competencies on pages 15 and 16 of his Al-Ahkam. A summary of this endeavor is entered on page 194 of our An-Nidhamus-Siyasi Fil-Islam. Considering him as the Prophet’s successor who had been the authority in both mundane and supernal affairs, the caliph is the Muslims’ religious authority. He has the authorization of practicing the same acts practiced by the Prophet, since he is his representative in every field except prophesy. Moreover, there are some privileges given to the caliphs while the Prophet himself had not practiced. An example of these is the heir apparent of caliphate. According to Sunnis' opinion, the Prophet left his nation without nominating a guide, a leader, an authority or an imam; while Abu Bakr, the intelligent, named Omar as his heir apparent after he had been counseled by the grand Sahaba. In his turn, Omar defined six individuals for succeeding him. A scrutinizing view at Omar's will reveals that Othman was practically the one intended. Othman was originally called ‘Radeef’ which stands for the heir apparent. Talha, however, was absent during the advisory board Omar had ordered of for electing the new caliph. Had Az-Zubeir, Talha and Ali adopted the same line, Othman should certainly, however, have been the caliph. A literal implementation of Al-Faruq's will, beyond any dispute, leads to Othman's being elected for caliphate. This very result is attained by taking an accurate look at any of the references involved.
During the Umayid caliphate, the president of the state, who came to power due to his domination, used to nominate his heir apparent. In other words, the prevailing individual was the caliph, who was the authority having competence of assigning his successor. The same thing is said about the Abbasid and the Ottoman caliphate.
Abu Bakr and Omar were the originators of the principal of the caliph's nominating his successor. Hence; this procedure was pursued by the others. There is a difference between the purport intended by Abu Bakr and Omar at inventing the heir apparent principal and that intended by the others. The earliers used this principal for evading the circumstance that any of their relatives may come to power, while the others used it for enabling their relatives from prevailing the state and ruling the government after them. Later on, the current caliph's naming and electing his successor became a regular practice. It was seen as one of the caliph's rights. Including Ibn Khuldoun, a many Sunni scholars received this matter as one of the caliph's rights. “The imam should select on behalf of people in his life and, sequentially, after his death.

Sunnis regard the caliph who comes to power and practices its responsibilities as the very authority of the political and religious affairs. Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman, Muawiya, Yazeed, Marwan and so on were the supreme authorities during their reigns. Each played the role of authority in his time. The same thing is said about the Abbasid and Ottoman caliphs. Prevalence is the actual measure of authority. The prevailing ruler, similarly, is the imam, the guide and the authority of the nation in both mundane and religious affairs.
Abu Ya'li Al-Izz records: “Many reports ascribed to imam Ahmed indicating that caliphate is attained by prevalence and preponderance. It may not be in need of a contract. In a narration related by Abdus Bin Malik Al-Attar, imam Ahmed says: ‘It is illicit for any who really believes in Allah and the Hereafter to pass a single night before he declares fealty to the individual, whether virtuous or immoral, who used his force in dominating affairs of the Muslims and became a caliph and titled Amirul-Mu'minin.’ In another narration reported by Abul-Harith with respect to rebellion against rulers, imam Ahmed says: ‘Muslims should support the victorious party in case two parties struggle for coming to power.’ This rule was inferred from the (legal) ruling legislated by Abdullah Bin Omar Bin Al-Khattab when he led the collective prayer in Al-Madina on the day of battle of Harra. He said: ‘We are with the prevalent. People should swear allegiance to the predominating.’”
This is the conclusion of the political system of Islam. People should declare their fealty to the predominating, apart from regarding religion, qualifications or legal situation. Such a saying became a part of the political Shari'a.
Concisely, for Sunnis, the prevalent circulating ruler became the authority in the entire affairs of the Islamic nation.

The prevailing ruler is the actual supreme authority of the nation in total mundane and religious affairs. Rulers should, even if bed-ridden, nominate an heir apparent as the new imam, leader and authority. Rulers enjoy authorization of doing so since they are the Wali and the warden of this nation who chooses for people in life as well as after death. Rulers should appoint an individual taking the charges of people whose role is to confide only. Legally, this procedure was known as ‘people's congruity’ which was first originated by Abu Bakr's nominating Omar as his successor, and the attendant Sahaba permitted and committed themselves to this.
In a like manner, the ceremony of Muawiya's nominating Yazeed as the heir apparent was attended by the remaining Sahaba. Practically, people should declare their allegiance to the new caliph assigned by the late. Objectors of such a procedure should be decided as ill-doers.
Competencies of the current caliph regarding nominating an heir apparent are limitless and irrefutable, since he is looked as ‘confident’ as Ibn Khuldoun describes. (Abu Bakr, the bed-ridden, named Omar as the heir apparent and told Othman, the registrar of this decision, that he would have been fit for it.)
Omar, in a like situation, discussed the Muslims' affairs with himself and reviewed various aspects of the matter while he was in his last moments. As he scrutinized the most appropriate who would have the ability of occupying his place, Omar said: “Had Abu Ubeideh been alive I would have nominated for caliphate. Had Khalid Bin Al-Waleed been alive I would have nominated for caliphate. Had Salim, Abu Hutheifeh's slave, been alive I would have nominated for caliphate.” This indicates that Salim, Abu Hutheifeh's slave, could have been the caliph if he had been alive. Salim was not from Quraish. His lineage was unknown. Nevertheless, he was, as Al-Bukhari recorded, leading the Muhajirs and the Ansar in collective prayers held in Qeba Mosque. By the way, if Salim's being the caliph was an all right matter, why was it, then, illicit for the Ansar, who were racially closer to the Prophet, to be caliphs? Besides, how should Salim have been caliph while the three Quraishi individuals who attended the Ansar' meeting at the Saqeefeh of Bani Sa'ideh, argued that they had been more eligible to caliphate for their being the Prophet's clan and people? Similarly, how should Salim have been the caliph while the immutable rule says: caliphs should be constantly from Quraish? How did it become, later on, lawful to designate Me'ath Bin Jabal, the Ansari, for leadership while it had been illegal for the Ansar to have leadership? Finally, Khalid did exert all efforts for the sake of combating Islam, while Ali spared no efforts for the sake of defending it; on which principal was Khalid preferred to Ali?!
For a simple reason, Omar refused the suggestion of nominating his son, Abdullah, as the heir apparent. The reason provided by Omar was that Abdullah had lacked even the ability to divorce his wife in the proper way!!
It is remarkable to reflect precisely upon the report that Omar (Pleased be him), finally, decided to designate Ali Bin Abi Talib for caliphate, but he was fainted!!
From the above we can conclude that, for Sunnis, competencies enjoyed by the present caliphate with regard to nominating the heir apparent or the morrow caliph, are incontrovertibly conclusive. It is worthy mentioning that the law of nominating an heir apparent was first originated by Abu Bakr who named Omar as his successor, and Omar who established the six-member advisory board according to which Othman was practically the one intended. Nomination of an heir apparent was mostly followed, in the form of a legislated law, in the Umayid reign. The Abbasids and Ottoman followed the same practice. The heir apparent was usually the late’s son or one of the royal family members.
Arguing for keeping Muslims' good, the nomination of an heir apparent and a morrow authority became an ordained law. Ummul-Mu'minin advised Omar to nominate the morrow caliph so that they, Mohammed's nation, should not be scattered. Omar sought her directions in this regard. This means that the caliph would have nominated the exact one A'isheh had selected.
“Not all of the Prophet's companions -Sahaba- were legible for issuing verdicts. Not all of them were referred in questions regarding the religion. This matter, however, was exclusively attached to the retainers of the Holy Quran, who were having full acquaintance of its entire aspects; such as repealing and repealed positions, bases and allegorical and the rest of its evidences. They had received these concerns from the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) directly or from their supreme tutors. Those individuals were named ‘Qurra'’ -reciters of the holy Quran-, since the Arab were illiterate nation and the ability of reading was an inexperienced matter on these days. This question lasted all over the first stage of Islam.” Ibn Khuldoun says.
By emergence of the Umayids as rulers, the essential sections of the entire Sahaba's ultimate decency conception were originated to comprise the entire Sahaba, with the lexical and the terminological meaning of this term. Without an exception and without any introductory, the entire Sahaba became so decent that they shall be certainly in the Paradise, and none of them shall be in the hell-fire, and they are inapplicable to forge lies. They grew idiosyncratic religious authorities that it is lawful to rest upon.
As he is reckoned with the first class Sahaba, Abu Bakr's opinions are lawful. The same thing is said about Omar's and any other Sahabi's. This is by the reason that the entire Sahaba are decent.
The following saying is imputed to Abu Haneefeh: “In case I could not find the text involved in the Quran or the Prophet's traditions, I go straightly to the Sahaba's opinions. Supposing there were various opinions of various Sahaba, I, then, have full option to adopt any provided that I do not prefer their followers' opinions to theirs.”
In his I'lamil-Muwaqqi'in, Ibnul-Qeyyim writes down: (For Imam Ahmed, principals of legislation are five. The first and the second are the -doctrinal- texts and the Sahaba's verdicts respectively. The Hanafites and the Hanbalites ruled of allocating the Holy Book of Allah to the Sahaba's deeds. Their argument is that the learned Sahabi would not neglect applying a general text unless he has an evidence. Hence, applying on the contrary of a doctrinal text is an evidence on the allocation of such a text. The Sahabi's deeds, however, are as same value as his words.)
Like the Prophet, each Sahabi has his own words, deeds and signature. This means that each Sahabi has his own tradition. From Ibnul-Qeyyim's saying of estimating a Sahabi’s deeds as same as his words, we can deduce any Sahabi's deed is used for allocating general significations of the Holy Book of Allah and generalizing a restricted meaning. This indicates that the Sahaba's sayings were treated as if they were revealed from the heavens. The most catastrophic matter in this question is that every Sahabi, in both lexical and terminological meaning, is intended in this rule. Abu Bakr, Muawiya, Marwan Bin Al-Hakam and Abdullah Bin Abi Sarh are, according to Sunnis’ conception, Sahaba of the same degree and standing, and are authorities and stars that guidance to the right path is gained by following any of them.
As an abridgment, the following is inferred; there is a congregational authority believed in by Sunnis. Unexceptionally, each Sahabi is an idiosyncratic unadulterated authority that is impracticable to forge lies. He speaks only the most evident right since he is one of the people of the Paradise. He whoever suspects them, or any one of them, is decided as a miscreant whom should be neither share in food or drink, nor offered the funeral Prayer when he perishes!! The Sahaba’s followers became their successors. The Sunni scholars were successors of the Sahaba's followers. Hence, the variant parties were the dominant powers.

In the Rashidite caliphate, the caliph was the supreme authority of Muslims. He was a decent Sahabi who has the right of seeking the advice of any and, in the same time, neglects or follows any opinion. Abu Bakr and Omar were wont to seek the advice of the retainers of the Quran such as Ali, Ubey Bin Ka'b, Me'ath Bin Jabal, Zeid Bin Thabit and the like. It was not unacceptable for the caliph to adopt the opinion of any of them, since the most important thing had been recognition of the Shariite ruling. There was no existence for the Sahaba's ultimate decency in the meaning for which the Umayids advertised and legislated. The majority of Sahaba played a little role in the aspect of authority. In other words, they were not authorities.
In the Umayid reign, the matter was not so different. After he had planted the entire Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, Muawiya, the decent Sahabi, became the Muslims’ supreme authority. He practiced his authority as same as the former caliphs did. He had the right to seek advice and adopt opinion of any. Thanks to the Sahaba's ultimate decency conception, Muawiya was regarded as one of people of the Paradise that he took the place of Abu Bakr, Omar, Othman and Ali despite the fact that he had been ‘released’ and son of ‘released’. As he was seen as a caliph, Muawiya enjoyed the caliphs’ same competencies. He had the right to adopt any opinion from any in case there were variant solutions of the same question.
For scholastic individuals, they also had the right to adopt any opinion in case of variety of solutions of the same question. The same thing is said about Sahaba's followers and scholars; their successors. The parties enjoyed the same right. After the collapse of the Islamic caliphate, every scholar became an independent authority who had his own verdicts and followers. In a like manner, every Arab party became an autonomous authority enjoying the right of issuing verdicts and having followers. The mission of each party was not more than proving its meritoriousness of predominating power in the province taken as its center.


In spite of the fact that (no inference in doctrinal texts), some used their own inference in questions about which decisive doctrinal texts were instituted. This inference led its owners to misconceive that it is not for the good of Islam and Muslims to cling to the doctrinal authority identified and nominated by the divine doctrine, since divine texts regarding this point had been originated by the Prophet's intellect, and they had not been divine commands. They also misthought that the Prophet, when he established bases of that analysis, had lacked the familiarity of the public's rejecting the Hashemites' joining leadership to prophesy. They alleged that some Muslims had not wanted to face the Prophet by exhibiting what they had in mind. Incidents went hurriedly. The surrogate authority was created in a short time. Originators of this operation thought that they had been doing well and serving Islam and the Prophet. They conjectured that the divine appositeness had granted them exclusively the mission of planning for prospective structure of Islam because they had been the most meritorious of taking this earnest task from among the Muslims. Thus, they garnered their efforts and went on implementing their strategy.

The Prophet was in his final moments. The Angel Gabriel visited him ceaselessly, especially in this period. The Prophet had full knowledge of the future of his nation. He did his mission so completely, conveyed his Lord's missives and explicated every thing totally. He was familiar with surrounding incidents. He realized that the current silence should be followed by an explosion destroying the political legality and doctrinal authority. This destruction would certainly disarm Islam and cripple the central originator of the divine solicitation and government.
For his nature, the Prophet should never be inclined by storms, or occluded from keeping his deep pathos of kindness and mercy towards people. In addition to completion of the religion, perfection of the divine grace and comprehensive explication of every thing needed including ways of appropriate defecation and urination, the Prophet insisted on condensing the entire situation for people. By this, he intended that people would be guided and would never be deviated or affected by the imminent pitfalls waylaying for them and waiting for his decease so that they -the pitfalls- would be opening their mouths for troubling Islam's pureness, hampering its movement and digressing its course.

The Prophet was bed-ridden. His blessed house suffocated with the grand Sahaba. He importunately persisted on summarizing the situation and reminding of the future course of the Islamic march. He said: “Fetch me a paper so that I will record a decree after which you shall never be deviated.”
What is the wrong with such a prophetic cognizance? Who would reject preservation against deviation? For what is this matter rejected? For whose good is it rejected? Moreover, considering Mohammed as an ordinary Muslim, not a prophet and a leader of the nation, it is rightful for every Muslim to record his will and say whatever he wants, specially just before his final departure. It is optional for the receivers to apply or discount that will or saying.
Al-Faruq, Omar Bin Al-Khattab, interfered and addressed at the retinue: “The Prophet is dominated by his pains. You have the Quran. We are sufficed by God's Book.”
The retinue were engaged in discrepancy. Some supported the Prophet's demand with recording a decree after which deviation shall be thoroughly suspended. While others supported Omar's request of standing against that demand. When their dispute attained its climax, the Prophet dismissed them.
According to another narrative, when the Prophet demanded with a paper on which he would record a decree protecting against thorough deviation, the retinue disputed. It is disapprovable to dispute in the attendance of a prophet. They claimed that the Prophet had been speaking out of dotage. “Quit me!” the Prophet said, “Pains I am engaged in are more favorable than deeds you are drawing me to.”
According to a third; the Prophet said: “Fetch me a paper and an inkpot so that I will record a decree protecting from deviation for ever.” They answered: “Prophet of God is speaking our of dotage.”
According to a fourth narrative ascribed to Al-Bukhari, the Prophet said: “Fetch me a paper so that I will record a decree protecting you from deviation for ever.” “The Prophet is affected by his pains. We have, sufficiently, the Book of God.” Omar Bin Al-Khattab commented. So, they were engaged in litigious dispute. “Quit me.” the Prophet settled the divergence, “Before me it is disapprovable to engage in dispute.”
According to a fifth narrative of Al-Bukhari, the Prophet said: “Fetch me a paper so that I will record a decree protecting you thoroughly against deviation.” They were engaged in dispute. It is disapprovable to dispute before a prophet. “What is the wrong with him? Has he been speaking out of dotage? Ask him.” they commented. Some faced him with these questions frequently. “Quit me,” he said, “pains I am engaged in are more favorable than deeds you are drawing me to.”
According to a sixth reported by Al-Bukhari, the Prophet said: “Fetch me a paper so that I will record a decree protecting you thoroughly from deviation.” They were engaged in dispute. It is disapprovable to dispute before a prophet. “What is the wrong with him? Has he been speaking out of dotage? Ask him.” they commented. “Quit me,” he said, “pains I am engaged in are more favorable than deeds you are drawing me to.”
As to a seventh of Al-Bukhari, the Prophet said: “Let me record a decree according to which you shall never be deviated.” “The Prophet has been affected by his pains. You have the Quran. We are sufficed by the Book of Allah.” Omar commented.
The attendants were engaged in litigious dispute. Some supported the Prophet's demand and others supported Omar's suggestion. “Quit me.” The Prophet said as their divergence attained its climax.
According to another report, Omar Bin Al-Khattab said: “The Prophet is speaking out of dotage…”
Al-Faruq declared that he had occluded the Prophet from recording that decree so that he would prevent him from nominating Ali for leadership.


The first party: Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family), the messenger of Allah, seal of prophets and the imam (president) of the Islamic state.
The adversary party: Omar Bin Al-Khattab; one of the grand Sahaba and most remarkable viziers of the Islamic state and the second successor after the Prophet.
Place of encounter: The Prophet's house.
Witnesses of the encounter: the grand Sahaba (pleased be them).


The attendants dissented on two groups:
The first group supported Al-Faruq in preventing the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) from recording that decree. This group argued that Al-Faruq had been one of the most considerable Sahaba and Prophet's viziers. He cared for Islam. He thought that there had been no incentive to annoy the diseased Prophet by allowing him to record that will. The Quran is sufficient in this regard. It is the security against deviation. Hence, it is inconsequential to have the decree the Prophet would write.
The second group rejected originally any sort of encounter between followers and their leaders; a believer and a prophet whose mission is acceptably satisfactory; an apostle who directly receives instructions from God and an applier of such instructions; a prophet that is a head of a government and one of his ministers. The group members determine that it is imperative to give the Prophet a chance to say or record everything he intends since he is still a prophet and head of the government till the last moment of his life and till someone occupies his place. From another face, he is a Muslim who lawfully enjoys freedom of speaking out and recording whatever he intends. Lastly, he was the master of the house in which these incidents had occurred. So, every individual has the right to say anything in his own house.

Al-Faruq proved his being a new huge trend that had the capability of preventing the Prophet from recording his will. Many supporters was attracted by this new trend in the case of encountering the Prophet directly. decorously, he could move and lead the coming incidents. Till this time, none could certainly identify the individual who advised the Ansar to hold a meeting in the Bani Sa'ideh's Saqeefeh -shed-. Similarly, none could understand the way by which this meeting was held. None also understood how Omar had lonlily known of it. The most authentic matter is that Abu Bakr, Omar and Abu Ubeideh had been the only Muhajirs who attended that meeting. The most authentic report is that Abu Bakr (pleased be him) had been helping the Prophet's immaculate household establish their decedent's funeral. A most authentic matter, also, is that it was Omar who had called Abu Bakr and told of the Saqeefeh meeting. Another most authentic report is that Abu Bakr and Omar had taken Abu Ubeideh with them as they accidentally found him in their way to Bani Sa'ideh's Saqeefeh.
Al-Faruq, therewith, lived in the core of these incidents. He shadowed the situation so scrupulously and continuously. In the Ansar’s meeting, he was the star who could steer results to his wishes. He would have been the caliph had he intended to. Just after the cessation of that meeting and the majority's declaring fealty to Abu Bakr, Omar himself led the completion of the fealty declaration process. He promoted that the Muhajirs should swear allegiance to Abu Bakr whom had just been elected, by the Ansar and Omar himself, as the new leader. The Umayids, led by Othman, hurried to declaring their fealty. It was Omar Bin Al-Khattab who enlisted, from the voters of Abu Bakr, a phalanx for taking Ali and his companions out of Fatima Az-Zahra's house by force, and making them swear allegiance to the nominated caliph. It was Omar who menaced to kill Ali if he would refrain from swearing allegiance It was Omar who advised Abu Bakr to gift Abu Sufian the alms for guaranteeing his loyalty to the new government It was Omar who suggested to Abu Bakr assigning Yazeed Bin Abi Sufian as the commander of the army of Syria that became the tremendous power helped in the settlement of Abu Bakr's government. Soon after that, As-Siddiq was deceased. Omar inherited that stable government easily without any sort of opposition. This inheritance was a step followed by another. Sooner or later, historians shall perceive that Al-Faruq had an immense unprecedented capacity of planning and hypothesizing. He played the role of constituent body of the post-prophesy era. He arranged the essentialities of the coming ruling of Islam. He decided not to let the Hashemites join leadership to prophesy. Thus, caliphate should be inherited far away from them. It should be a pure right of the predominant individuals apart from the legality or the illegality of the means of predominance.

By the previously mentioned encounter, the ideas of predominance, preferring the follower to the master and the equality between masters and their followers were originated. Moreover, states of confusedness and perplexity of discerning the right were emanated.
Al-Faruq argued that a hazardous question might have been arisen from the diseased Prophet's recording his will. A group of Sahaba supported this claim. This argument was created out of doubt.
The other party argued that Mohammed had been still a prophet till his last respiration and till his immaculate soul leaves to the Creator. They believed he had never been speaking out of desire. This is an ascertained fact. Consequently, it is irrational to depend upon doubts and disdain the ascertained fact. Disease is not an obstacle against speaking.
1. When Abu Bakr was arduously affected by his disease, he sought the celebrities' advice. After that, he summoned Othman alone. “Write down:” Abu Bakr asked Othman just before he was fainted. During these moments, Othman wrote: “I do use Omar Bin Al-Khattab as my successor to caliphate.” When he regained consciousness, Abu Bakr ordered Othman to read what he had written down. “So, you did so since you anticipated that people would be engaged in discrepancies if I passed away during my previous syncope. Did you not?” said Abu Bakr. “Yes, I did.” asserted Othman. “God reward you for Islam and its people.” blessed Abu Bakr. This form was agreed upon by Abu Bakr. This is an unanimously authentic fact.
2. When Omar was in his final disease, the physician surprised him that he would not catch that evening. “Fetch me that paper, son.” Omar asked Abdullah. As the paper was between his hands he erased it and shouted out of the pains he was suffering: “By God I swear, I would sacrifice what is all found on this globe for the horror of the coming stage.” Abdullah, the son, rejected his dying father's demand with fixing his cheek to the ground. “Woe is your mother. Put my cheek to the ground. Woe is Omar and Omar's mother if God will not forgive him.” said Omar to his son.
In spite of the harsh pains Abu Bakr and Omar were suffering in their final diseases, they could record their wills. Omar could arrange the matter of the six-member advisory board in a form that he was assured of Othman's being the caliph. He also guaranteed that a Hashemite would never be elected for leadership whatever his qualifications were. Scrupulously, the two wills were implemented. Although the two were suffering unbearable pains, they were allowed to speak out their wills. During recording their wills, Abu Bakr and Omar were ceremoniously the caliphs of the Muslims. Thus, they enjoyed the right of practicing their duties since they were still alive and operative.
By common consent, this is an indisputable fact. How was it allowable for Abu Bakr and Omar to record their wills while they were suffering pains of their final diseases harsher than those suffered by the Prophet during his final disease? Nevertheless, the Prophet was prevented from recording his will.
Supposing Mohammed is equated to Abu Bakr and Omar; had it not been rightful for him -Mohammed- to practice what they -Abu Bakr and Omar- practiced thereafter? At any cost, the supposition of equating Abu Bakr and Omar to Mohammed is topically and positively inoperative. This is by the fact that Mohammed was an imam and a prophet masseged by God, while Abu Bakr and Omar were only fellows. Mohammed was speaking out of God's revelation. In several occasions, the Prophet asserted that the revelation had been coming to him during periods of physical complaint. God, in the Quran, says: (And whatever the Apostle gives you, accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back.) (And your companion is not gone mad.) (Nor does he speak out of desire.) (It is naught but revelation that is revealed.) How should a man with such divine qualifications and attributes be instantaneously changed into a dotard? How should he be irreliable even in recording his own will?
Despite that this occurrence is an undeniable and indefensible fact that exploded the entire future of Islam and was the seed from which the total tragedies and catastrophes that acted upon Islam were originated, Sunnis are still paying no attention to it. They are neglecting inclusively and regarding it as an ordinary narrative.
Thus, the scale of the follower was practically weighed against the leader. The follower became an authority while the leader stood watching. The follower achieved his layout and his volition, around which people circumambulated, became the prevailing. The idea of prevalence was applied and fruited. Later on, the principal of prevalence was legislated. It became licit for people to watch the combat before they opt for being in the predominant's line, aside from regarding qualifications, legibility and religion of that predominant. Hence, the follower contained his master and the less favorable preceded the most.
Thereupon, it is not surprising to see Muawiya Bin Abi Sufian, the ‘released’ and the son of the ‘released’ and one of the heart-inclined class, come to power and contend with the foremost Muslim and Allah's devotee and the master of every male and female Muslim, according to divine texts, for the caliphate. It is not astonishing to see him exert efforts to persuade the Muslims of his being fitter and more preferred than Ali. As well, it is not remarkable to see many people in the various eras of Islam reckon the two in the same degree considering them as equally authorities and people of the Paradise.
It is also not inconceivable to see Marwan, the son of Al-Hakam Bin Al-Aas who had been banished from Al-Madina all the times of the Prophet, Abu Bakr and Omar, demand with the position of caliphate since Othman had assigned him as his prime minister and his son-in-law after he had permitted his father to enter Al-Madina city with exquisite reverence and honor.
The differences between the followers and their masters, the favored to Allah and Islam and the retarded were rendered null and void. Al-Waleed Bin Aqaba, who led the collective Fajr prayer and performed it in four Rak'as -units of prayer- while he was drunk and wondered if people asked for more, became the leader of Al-Hussein Bin Ali Bin Abi Talib who should, according to the Umayid criteria, listen to the sermons of that drunkard governor and ask his advice in his mundane and religious questions!!

The prevalent, whatever he was, became the predominant and the master. He became the imam and the president of the Muslims and their state, and the only one to whom they should refer in mundane and religious questions. He was the holder of power means and in whose hands was the perfect control on the imports of the state. He enjoyed the right of giving or depriving any of their rights. Except for Allah and his religion, none had been the supervisor of that prevalent. He was the general leader of the Muslims' armed forces, and he had full competency to use these forces for achieving internal or external security and for submitting his people whether voluntarily or coercively. He had full control on the mass media and the ability of changing the white into black and the opposite. By controlling the mass media, the predominant had the capability of making the dwarf seem to be giant and the opposite. The supporters of such a predominant ruler were reprogrammed to be the front of their master who had extensive ground in directing the policy of that state. Later on, they became authorities to whom people should refer. Their duties were adopting that predominant's viewpoint and using his methods for their impressive authorities. Hence, they were regarded as celebrities of the society and the gleaming stars. They were leading to the concentration point; the predominant's viewpoint. Ordinary people played on the same cord. This became the formulation to which people had been unitedly submitted. With the pass of years, this formulation were devoted. With the pass of decades, it was radically planted in the ground of factuality. Finally, it became a public opinion and a political persuasive belief.
In the midst of the previous circumstances, the Prophet's immaculate progeny demanded with the prevalence of legality. They called for their right. People, however, stood against their legality. Abul-Hassan's style of opposing Abu Bakr was ultimately civilized and logic. This matter was supported by Bashir Bin Sa'd, the first man who declared loyalty to Abu Bakr as a leader. When he listened to Ali's argument, Bashir said: “The Ansar would have referred to you totally if they had listened to your words before they swore allegiance to Abu Bakr.”
At any rate, the power and the opposition are of customary situations. Naturally, it is impractical for the rulers or their supporters to trust politically the opposition or to handle their achievements to them in any consequence. In the case involved particularly, it was decided not to do away with Ali since Fatima, the daughter of Mohammed, was backing him. Still, he was threatened to be killed if he would disdain swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr. It was also decided not to coerce him to declare his fealty to the new leadership, for the sake of Fatima.
Besides, while Imam Ali and his wife, Fatima Az-Zahra, were passing by the sessions of the Ansar at night and asking for support, the authorities took no influential procedures against them. The Ansar said: “O daughter of God's messenger! We have already declared loyalty to that man. We would not have elected other than your husband and cousin had he come to us before Abu Bakr.” Ali answered them: “Should I have left the Prophet's body in his house without burying him and gone out for contesting people in his government?” Fatima commented: “Abu Hassan did exactly what was required from him. They did what Allah shall penalize and amerce for.”
By this logical result, Imam Ali and his supporters were dismissed just after the decease of Fatima. The ruling authorities' inclination of isolating Imam Ali from the Hashemites became evident due to their endeavors of dragging Al-Abbas towards their power by urging his progeny and him on holding positions in their government. Al-Abbas refused such endeavors so strictly and rejected their offers so antiseptically.
It is a categorical standard that ordinary people, in case they are given the alternative to choose either the side of the ruling authority or the opposition side, to opt for the earlier. Consecutively, the Prophet's progeny's attitudes were about to dissect the rope of intimacy with the ruling authorities thoroughly after Omar's intendment to put Fatima's house on fire while there was a number of people inside it. God, however, saved against so.
As a means of stopping the Hashemite march, the ruling authorities were converted that it is illicit for the Hashemite to join leadership to prophesy. They also believed that people of Quraish had been right when they applied this principal. Moreover, a provisory decision that any Hashemite individual, apart from qualifications and legibility, should not be held any position in the government, was enacted. In the reigns of Abu Bakr and Omar, this decision was literally implemented. Besides, Omar asserted practically that any supporter of the Hashemites should not hold any position in the government.Accordingly, Ali and his party were secluded.
Imam Ali and his party could live peacefully with the two Sheiks -Abu Bakr and Omar-. The Prophet's progeny were preceded in distributing the imports of the state among people. Their souls and properties were secured in that period. The two Sheiks were wont to refer and seek the advise of Imam Ali in many questions. Affairs of the state were stable owing to the conquests and the two Sheiks' scorning their own caprices.
Not too long after Othman's being the caliph, the Sahaba left him gradually and the Umayids supplanted them. Othman's palace was suffocated with the Umayids who, actually, did not add anything new. The positions from which the Prophet's progeny were forbidden during the two Sheik's reigns, were not allowed for them during Othman's. The difference was that since Ali and his party were not to shun the flaws of Othman's men; the Umayids, the ruling authorities reckoned Ali's enjoining good and forbidding evil with the banned activities of the opposition. Therefore, they regarded Ali and his party as unwelcomed persons. In addition to the past throngs of hostility between the Hashemites and the Umayids, these motives were extended till they attained the climax when a military combat occurred between Muawiya, the governor of Syria, and Ali, the imam and the leader of the Islamic nation. Power overcame legality. Muawiya was assigned as the actual king of the nation. That occurred in the year called later on ‘year of congruity’. A new era of persecuting Mohammed's progeny started. It was teary and bloody. Mohammed's progeny, hence, were almostly terminated. Maligning and reviling at them became a legislative imposing precept all over the state. People were the chorus whose job was repeating the ruler's slanderous words. Mohammed's progeny were banished. Their testimonies were decided as inadmissible. Names of those who showed any sort of loyalty to Ali and his sons were erased from the general register of the state. Salaries and rights of such individuals were cut off.

The prevailing caliph, whoever he was, became the authority to whom people should refer in total mundane and religious affairs. He became substitute of the actual leader of this nation and head of the Prophet's household. Owing to their ultimate decency and their being people of the Paradise, Sahaba, unexceptionally, were the congregational authorities of this nation. They became the substitutes of the Prophet’s immaculate progeny. On that account, the Prophet's progeny showed their objection, while the Sahaba showed their satisfaction.
The Sahaba's followers became the congregational authority of this nation, whose mission was backing the supreme authority; the caliph, after their masters. The followers' followers should succeed. The scholars succeeded those followers' followers. They were seen as the prophets’ heirs. In association with rulers, those scholars should play the role of authority. Consequently, the role of the Prophet's progeny were belittled in front of this stuff.

Trends and activities of the majority were translated into general satisfactory tendencies braced exclusively in the public's mentalities. Objectors of such satisfactory tendencies were seen as unbidden. They were confined, discriminated, denigrated, conflicted by mass media, decided as mutineers and dissidents, defamed. Their viewpoints were misrepresented. From these causes, accusing of atheism became more moderate than accusing of being loyal to the Prophet's progeny. Opportunity of repentance was offered to those who showed atheism. They would be welcomed if they accepted it. The loyal to the Prophet's progeny were offered nothing. He would not be accepted at all even if he showed releasing of his loyalty. Correspondingly, acceding to disbelievers was treated in a form of less extremity than acceding to Mohammed's progeny. These tendencies became a part of the nation's heritage received by successive generations. Like the inheritance of fathers and forefathers, Muslims, hence, inherited that Shias’ being atheists because they are betaking Ali as their god and reproving the virtuous Sahaba and…etc. Despite the fact that Muslims who received this idea from their fathers and forefathers will certainly transfer it to their sons and grandsons, none of these generations listened to Shias' viewpoints towards these accusals, nor did they exert efforts to scrutinize their cogency. Nothing but imitation, by which they learnt that Shias had been enemies of this nation, they did take as an evidence on cogency of these accusals. The present scholars, who are tutoring the morrow's scholars in universities, are also unaware of the significance, history and incentives of Shism and its emergence as an ideological and religious trend. They only report, literally, the 1400 year old viewpoints of the opponents of Shism whenever they attempt to provide Shias' perspectives. Hence, the adversary party became the narrator, arbiter and judge in the same time. Essentially, the divergence between the two parties is of political reasons. Shias, as a matter of fact, have received Islam from the Prophet's progeny. The sect of the Prophet's progeny is Mohammed's sect (peace be upon him and his family). They are indeed the saved group who followed the Prophet's progeny perfectly.


They say: It is untrue that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) left his nation without nominating a leader and an authority, since these two matters are indispensable and rudimentary for the nation every time. The saying of the Prophet's leaving his nation without a leader and an authority contravenes perfection and completion of the religion and the divine grace. It also opposes the thorough explication asserted by the Holy Quran. How should the Prophet explicate a minute affair, such as the proper way of urination, while he neglects a fundamental affair which is leadership of the nation? Similarly, leaving the nation without a leader and an authority is a matter contradicting the Prophet's mercy and care for his people. According to the Holy Quran, God has thrown in his Apostle's heart mercy and care for this nation. Who should represent the Prophet in his political and religious duties? Who should explain the Quran? Who should show limits of circle of legality? Who should be the saving ship of this nation? Who should be guiding people to the right? Who should be the security of this nation? These functions are elements of specialization. Like medicine, engineering or atomics, these elements are in need of an individual specialized. None other than the most favorable, the fittest and the most familiar with questions of the doctrine, who should join political and religious leadership, can make out these concerns intensively. These qualifications are identified by God alone. Legally and logically, it is impractical for God to leave this concern to people's fancies. They are within the fundamental principles of Islam and the basic prerequisites of the divine solicitation, government and nation. The greatest evidence on essentiality of this question is that the deniers who had traversed the fact that the Prophet himself had clarified the succeeding leadership, did their best to establish a positive leadership that was stabilized for the predominant power after the great massacres, suffered by the Islamic nation, committed for the sake of uniting the nation by force under authority of that strongest ruler. Owing to the absence of the predominant knight, people were engaged in numerous sects, each of which did establish its own authority.

God, the Elevated, has revealed the Quran as a divine message to mankind and a divine doctrine that provides an unequivocal depiction for the movements of everything. It also systematizes the political and religious affairs on this earth and exposes the essential characteristics of the other life, and links these two lives in a reciprocal fastened bind. In a like manner, that divine doctrine is provided as one of the essentialities of God's Book revealed to Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family), God's slave, so that he should explicate it to people hypothetically and practically on levels of solicitation and government. The Prophet did lead the solicitation and its outcome; the government. A thorough explication of the divine doctrine was introduced by the Prophet during both stages. The doctrine, likewise, explicated everything thoroughly for those who received the Remembrance; the Holy Quran. Hence, since he was the fittest for leading the followers and applying the doctrine, the most favorable, the keenest and the most acquainted of that divine doctrine, Mohammed (peace be upon him and his family) was elected as the authority. During the Prophet's blessed lifetime, none had the capability of taking his place or shouldering his missions. God, Who does credulously realize the fittest for leading the followers and applying the doctrine, the most favorable, the keenest and the most acquainted of that divine doctrine, has been the specialist in electing Mohammed for this mission. On that account, God dedicately has granted Himself the right of nominating the political and religious leader. He, the Elevated, has provided that leader before people and averred of his being the most acquainted, the keenest, the most favorable and the fittest. God has also authorized him to enjoy thorough adequacies of explicating the doctrine to people and being the political and religious leader and judge.
In case people accepted and showed loyalty to that political and religious leadership God has provided, Mohammed should be the leader.
The godly solicitation is ceaseless. The believing government endorses that solicitation. The general purpose is guiding mankind to the right. Mohammed is a man to be inescapably deceased. God, lonelily, realizes credulously the fittest among Mohammed's followers for leading the nation and applying the doctrine, the most favorable, the keenest and the most acquainted of that divine doctrine. For these reasons, it was God's dedicate concern to provide the political and religious leader after Mohammed. In case people accepted and swore allegiance to that individual provided by God as the political and religious leader, they should be guided to the right path. Otherwise, a process of disintegration between political and religious leadership would occur, and the political leader would be an individual other than the religious one. Thus, that ruler -political leader- shall certainly predominate the religious leadership someday.
Al-Hussein Bin Ali Bin Abi Talib (peace be upon him) is, according to doctrinal texts, the imam, the political and religious leader and the guide of people during his lifetime. Nevertheless, people, coercively or voluntarily, swore their allegiance to Yazeed Bin Muawiya who, consequently, became the political ruler while Al-Hussein was the religious authority. The instance should have been that Al-Hussein holds political and religious leadership together. As people declared fealty to Yazeed, an isolation between the political and the religious leadership occurred. Yazeed became the actual ruler. Since religious leadership was appendant to the political, the ruler would not be content before he denuded the religious authority from his competencies, so that he would be able to have the religious leadership beside the political. This exactly what happened. Killing was the only way Yazeed had to deprive Al-Hussein of his competencies. He did kill him.
Shias say that improvement of the Muslims' conditions and future is depending upon combining the political and religious leaderships. In other words, the ruler should be the religious authority and that ruler and religious authority should be the one elected by God.
As an abstract we say: God has been dedicately the specialist in electing and nominating the political and religious leader of the nation. This is by the reason that He, the Elevated, does credulously realize the fittest for leading the followers and applying the doctrine, the most favorable, the keenest and the most acquainted of that divine doctrine. Before the Prophet's being taken to the Exalted Associate, God had elected the political and religious leader for Muslims. He, the Elevated, ordered the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) of declaring so in the attendance of one hundred thousand Muslims during the Farewell Pilgrimage. For ten times, the Prophet repeated this declaration. People, after all, swore allegiance to men other than that authority nominated by God. Therefore, a process of separation occurred between the two leaderships. Rulers, thereafter, marched forwardly and deprived the religious authorities of their capacities. Thus, rulers, using their force, held fast on the political and religious leaderships.

Shias allege that Imam Ali (peace be upon him) was the leader and the authority nominated by God who elected him to succeed the Prophet in political and religious affairs. God, correspondingly, ordered His Prophet of declaring this divine election. Therefore, he declared it in front of one hundred thousand Muslims. That was in the Farewell Pilgrimage. They also allege that God has nominated Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein respectively as the successors of Imam Ali, and arranged this question in the form that every imam should nominate his successor. They were twelve imams. The twelfth was Imam Al-Mahdi (Mahdi). This imam is the Shariite ruler of the Islamic republic of Iran pursuant to the Article 5 of the Iranian Constitution. The representative of that Shariite Imam is the actual leader of Iran whose missions are practicing the activities of the Shariite Imam substitutionally till God shall cause that imam to come forth.
With respect to the Islamic Shari'a, the head of the Prophet's household is the imam, ruler and authority in every time. Headship of the Prophet's household is perpetually operative. In spite of the rulers' active endeavors to terminate the Prophet’s immaculate progeny, they shall never be extinct.

As long as Shias are right, what for are they confronted by Sunnis? As an answer to this inquiry, we say: Shias are seen as enemies because their allegations put the rulers on the carpet, and invalidate reasons of their existence as authorities, and create excuses for their enemies to supplant. Rulers had full control on imports of the state. They, practically, had brimming option to dispose in such imports. They had the dominion upon the armed forces and their remunerations. Hence, these forces comply to those rulers amenably. Rulers possessed the entire mass media. Shias, on the other hand, were representing the opposition party all the time. For these reasons, rulers showed malice against them and persecuted and reproduced them as devils, rebellious and deserters of the nation's congruous faith. Majority of people had no option other than agreeing to the ruling authorities' claims. Because Shias had not been granted any opportunity to express their viewpoints without encumbrance, rulers misrepresented and distorted such viewpoints. Ordinary people reported these distorted viewpoints rulers had mentioned, surreptitiously, on behalf of Shias, for the sake of making people shrink back from them progressively. As a matter of fact, most people deem these distorted viewpoints’ veracity adopted by Shias. The reason beyond so was condensational reports appertained to this aspect.

From all sides, Sunnis shouted repeatedly with earsplitting cries: “Believe not Shias; they devoted themselves to being enemies of this nation, and satisfied themselves with rebellion against congruity.”
Ask them to provide an evidence on their claims.

Shias say: ‘year of congruity’ for Sunnis was that in which power overcame legality. Conception of Sunnism -pursuing the Prophet's traditions- from which they inferred their name, was originated when power overcame legality. Unlike the belief adopted by the public, ‘Sunni’ does not indicate pursuing the Prophet's traditions. Shias, in fact, are the most careful for pursuing the Prophet's deeds, words and signature. By despising partisan imitation, one can easily perceive that this saying is not irresponsible at all. By the same token, everybody is within reach to the authenticity of the previous allegation. Considering it is true, censure should be alleviated from us. Barring this, we shall retreat from the wrong. (Surely falsehood is a vanishing thing.)
Meeting the urgency of the pro-truth, the following is the decisive evidence on our claims:

For Shias, there were two authorities in Islam after the Prophet's decease:
The individual authority was held by the -foremost- head of the Prophet's household; Ali (peace be upon him). This authority faces the predominant ruler's dictatorship for Sunnis.
The congregational authority was held by the Prophet's progeny and household. These individuals were loyal to their head. They sided him in conserving sturdy origins of the religion.

Shias allege that it was God, the exalted, who assigned the two authorities and ordered His Prophet of declaring so to the Muslims. So, the Prophet did declare it in various occasions.

First: The Holy Verse of Wilaya; 5:55-6. (Only Allah is your Wali and His Apostle and those who believe, those who keep up prayers and pay the poor rate while they bow. And whoever takes Allah and His Apostle and those who believe for a guardian, then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant.)
These two Verses were revealed for Ali when he gave his ring as alms while he was performing the ritual genuflection of the prayer. In At-Tha'labi's Tafseer, for instance, these two Verses are debated in details. As he saw Ali give his ring as alms while he was in his ritual genuflection of the prayer, Mohammed, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family), recited the words Moses, the prophet, had supplicated his Lord with: ( And give me an aider from my family; Ali. Strengthen my back by him…)
Abu Therr reported: “By God I swear, before the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) had finished from reciting this supplication, Gabriel, the Angel, descended to him with the revelation of the Holy Verse of Wilaya. Exegesists of the Holy Quran, unanimously, remarked that the Holy Verse involved had been revealed for Ali.
The Prophet indeed assigned Ali, Amirul-Mu'minin, as the authority and his successor. This process was acted in the presence of one hundred thousand Muslims in Ghadeer Khumm. It was on that Thursday when Gabriel, the Angel, descended from the heavens five hours after the daybreak to address at the Prophet: “O Mohammed! Your Lord sends His greeting to you and say (O Apostle! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message; surely Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people.)” This Holy Verse was revealed on the day of Ghadeer -the day on which the Prophet led the Muslims to a place called ‘Ghadeer Khumm’ and declared that Ali would be his successor-.
After the Prophet's assigning Ali as the coming imam, authority and (caliph), the following Holy Verse was revealed: (This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion.) This very Verse was revealed in Ghadeer Khum, the exact place where Amirul-Mu'minin Ali, was declared as the succeeding leader. The revelation of that Verse occurred in Dhul-Hijja (the last month of the Hijri year) immediately after the ceremonies of assigning Ali as the succeeding leader.
Exactly after the ceremonies of designating Amirul-Mu'minin Ali, Omar Bin Al-Khattab approached him and said kiddingly: “Congratulations, son of Abu Talib! You became my master as well as the entire Muslims.” This is an authentic report.
In the coming eras, the Ghadeer day became a general festivity for Muslims. The hadith of Ghadeer has attained such a high rank of continuous narration that many Sunni scholars compiled thorough books in this concern. As examples of these books, we mention the following:
Ibn Hajar At-Tabari's Kitabul-Wilaya.
Abul-Abbas Bin Ahmed Bin Uqdeh's Kitabul-Wilaya. (333 A.H.)
Abu Bakr Al-Jessabi's Men Rawa Hadithe Ghadeeri Khumm. (355 A.H.)
Ad-Darqutni's ways of narrating the Hadith of Ghadeer. (385 A.H.)
Abu Sa'd As-Sejistani's Ad-Dirayeh Fi Hadithil-Wilaya. (477 A.H.)
Abul-Qasim Ubeidullah Al-Hanafi's Du'atul-Hudati Ila Eda'i Haqqil-Muwalat. (490 A.H.)
In addition, a great deal of other compilers of hadiths did collect hadiths appertained to this concern in many books. 116 Sahaba and 84 Sahaba's followers reported the hadith of Ghadeer. Beginning with the second to the fourteenth Hijri century, almostly, all of the Sunni scholars of various classes and sects, narrated the hadith of Ghadeer. Al-Amini, in his Al-Ghadeer, mentions that 360 scholars did refer to the hadith of Ghadeer. We should be sufficed with the fact that Omar Bin Al-Khattab approached Ali and addressed at him: “Congratulations, son of Abu Talib! You have become the master of every male and female believer.” That was on the day of the Ghadeer declaration.

In his Al-Mu'jamul-Kabeer, At-Tabarani relates:
(Hutheifeh Bin Useid Al-Ghefari, the reverent companion of the Prophet, said:
As he accomplished the rites of the Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) warned his companions against residing at some bushes in an elevated place. After a while, he (peace be upon him and his family) ordered them of sweeping that place by removing thistles found there. Next to these bushes, the Prophet had performed a prayer before he stood erect and orated: “O people! The Aware, the Knowing informed me that prophets attain only half of the age of the succeeding ones. I do conclude that I am to be soon invited, and I am to answer. I, as well as you, shall be questioned. What will you reply?” “We do confirm that you have conveyed, done well and advised. God may reward you with good.” They answered.
Thence, the Prophet said: “Do you maintain there is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is Allah's slave and apostle, and the Paradise is true, the Hell-fire is true, death is true, the post-earthly life is true and the Hour is coming, there is no doubt about it; and Allah shall raise up those in graves?” “Yes, we do maintain.” they answered. “O Allah! Be the witness.” supplicated the Prophet, and added: “O people! Allah is surely my Master. I am the master of the believers. I am preceded to the believers' souls. He whomever I was his master, this -Ali- is his master. O Allah! Accede to whom accedes to him, and oppose whom opposes him.”
The Prophet then added: “O people! I will be preceding you to the Heavenly Pool and you shall be following. It is a pool of an area larger than the distance between Busra -Syria- and San'a -Yemen-. In it, there shall be cups as numerous as stars. When you shall be coming to me on that Pool, I will ask you about the two weighty things. Suppose how should you esteem me in these two. The major weighty thing is the Book of Allah, the Elevated. It is a cord, one of its brims is at Allah's hand while the other is at yours. Cling to it and deviate not and distort not. The other is my clan; my household. The Aware, the Knowing has informed me that they shall never separate until they shall join me on the Pool.”

The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at Ali: “You are my successor in this world and in the Hereafter.” “After me, you are the master of every Muslim.” “He whomever I was his leader, Ali is his leader.” “Ali does deserve more than the share he had taken. He is your leader after me.” “You are surely the master of every believer, after me.” “He whomever I was his chief, he -Ali- is being his chief.” “He whomever I was his master, this -Ali- is being his master.” “You are surely the leader of the believers after me.”
The Hadith of Manzila -the credit- assured Ali's leadership; “Your credit to me is as same as Aaron's to Moses. Yet, there is no prophet proceeding me.” This hadith is one of the Prophet’s most authentic traditions that the entire hadithists reported and recorded.

The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) expressed: “I am the forewarner and Ali is the guide. By you, Ali, the guided -to the right path- shall be led.”

The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) stated: “This, Ali, and I shall be the attesters on my people on the Day of Resurrection.” “Ali is the door to my knowledge. After me, he shall be settling questions of what I have been asked to communicate to my people. Cherishing him is creed. Despising him is hypocrisy.” “I am the city of knowledge. Ali is its door.” In the Chapter: political leadership, these hadiths shall be detailedly debated. In a like manner, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at Ali: “After me, you shall be settling questions of discrepancy my people will be engaged in.”
Such traditions do assert that the Prophet had designated the succeeding authority to whom people should refer to in both political and religious affairs. That single authority was Ali Bin Abi Talib. In the Fourth Title of this book, a detailed debate will be given to this subject concerning political leadership of Islam.

Shias appraise the Prophet and his immaculate household (peace be upon them all) as their guide owing to their seniority in Islam and God's preferring them. They are, as Shias see, the sons, women and near people intended in the Holy Verse of Mubahala -supplicating God to curse the liar party-: (But whoever disputes with you in matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say: Come on let us call our sons and your sons and our women and your women and our near people and your near people, then let us be earnest in prayer, and pray for the curse of Allah on the liars. 3:61)
This Holy Verse was revealed in the favor of the Prophet, Ali, Fatima, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein (peace be upon them). In addition, they are the rope -covenant- of Allah; (And holdfast to the covenant (rope) of Allah altogether and be not disunited, 3:103)
They are people of the reminder -the Quran- about whom God said: (so ask the followers (people) of the reminder if you do not know. 21:7) They are also the envied intended in the Verse: (Or do they envy the people for what Allah has given them of His grace? 4:54) Similarly, they are the near of kin intended in the Verses: (And give to the near of kin his due.. 17:26) (.. It is for Allah and for the Apostle and for the near of kin.. 59:7) (And know that whatever thing you gain, a fifth of it is for Allah and for the Apostle and for the near of kin.. 8:41) They are the purified intended in the Verse: (Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, o people of the House! and to purify you a thorough purifying. 33:33) In the same way, they are the ones whose commitment is imposed by God and whose being blessed during obligatory prayers is also imposed as a pillar rite.
In addition, the Prophet's household are the minor weighty. The Holy Quran and they are standing for the fortress against deviation. They are the leading people and the ship of salvation; he shall be saved that whoever embarks it, while the tardy shall be surely sunk. They are the security against discrepancies. He should be reckoned with the party of the Satan that whoever opposes them. They are the security of this nation.
The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) stated: “With each generation of my nation, there will be decent individuals from my descendants, whose mission shall be eliminating, away from this religion, distortion of the deviated and falsification of the dishonest and misrepresentation of the ignorant. Your imams are your delegates to Allah. Decide on the most proper delegates.”

Since they have acceded to Mohammed and his immaculate household, and they betaken the head of the Prophet's household as their imam and guide, Shias are selected, by Allah, for conserving the religion with its total sturdy principals. Hence, the Prophet foretold of the good tidings that they are the best of mankind. As the Holy Verse: (As for those who believe and do good, surely they are the best of men (mankind) 98:7), was revealed, the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) addressed at Ali: “O Ali! These are you and your group.”

Copyright © 1998 - 2017 Imam Reza (A.S.) Network, All rights reserved.