Chapter 12

Between The Doctrine And Supreme Authority
The best way to understand the subject in this chapter is to mention some clear explanations about the two meanings of the succession to authority. That is because the Muslims have differed over it. Moreover, it is of great importance with one of the two parties (i.e., Shi'a and non-Shi'a), and is some times with them both.
Here, we want to explain the succession to authority as it is with the two parties (the Shi'a and the Sunnis). Meanwhile we want to extract the necessary information from this subject.
Furthermore, we will mention details, to clarify the two different ideas of both sides. Our plan is to make a good start for reform and prosperity in this society. Our words do not endanger both parties. Rather, they are full of good and reform for all.
The succession to authority (Khilafa) is general deputyship on behalf of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, in leading the Muslims after his death. The obligatory right of the successor (Khalifa) on the people is that they should obey him. Besides the obligatory right of the people on him is that he should act according to the Book of Allah and the Sunna (practice) of His Apostle, may Allah bless him and his family.
A group of the Muslims agreed on appointing one of them to assume this deputyship on behalf of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. They affirmed him even if he intended to usurp the succession to authority illegally. Thus they affirmed the Caliphate of Mu'awiya, "who sometimes took the succession to authority by using the sword and sometimes by using the trick and policy." [1] These are some examples of those who usurped the succession to authority: b. al-Zubayr, Abu al-`Abbas al-Saffah, `Abd al-Rahman al-Nasir, and the like. A group of the Muslims affirmed those who were appointed by their predecessors who took the succession to authority by force or by other means. Examples of these were `Umar, Yazid, al-Rashid, and the like. Also a group of the Muslims affirmed those who obtained the succession to authority through election. Examples of these successors were Abu Bakr, `Uthman, and Muhammad Rashad.
In appointing the successor after the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, the second party (i.e., the Shi'a) resorted to the Owner of the message (i.e., the prophet). So they (i.e., the Shi'a) did not follow any successor after him but those he himself appointed.
The two parties (i.e., the Shi'a and the Sunnis) have followed the above- mentioned theories in appointing the successor after the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family. [2]
As the two parties have differed over the ways of appointing the successor to authority, they have differed over changing and removing him from office. So according to the first (i.e., the Sunni) theory, the successor is removed from office when other than him is successful in overcoming him or when necessary. According to the theory of the text (i.e., the textual nomination), no one has the right to change the successor or to remove him from office. The successor appointed by the textual nomination was not liable to any defect. That is because his position was like that of the Prophet. In other words he was infallible as the Prophet was. They both got their infallibility from Allah, the Great and Almighty. The infallibility of the nominated successor was like that of the Prophet himself, may Allah bless him and his family.
So the caliphate or the succession after the Prophet, according to the first or the Sunni theory, is general supreme authority. It is restricted by a special constitution, and it is, in fact, like modern governments. It does not differ from them but in the constitution or as they differ from each other.
Besides the holiness of such caliphate is among the qualities of the person whom the people elect. Also it is among the qualities of the person who takes it by force. Such a person is some times the best of all people in holiness, and some times the most rebellious of them against the religion and good manners.
However, the caliphate or the succession after the Prophet, according to the textual nomination or the Shi'ite theory, is a Divine office. So the obedience of the successor is religiously obligatory, namely as the obligatory obedience of the Prophet. Besides The caliphate, in this sense, is the shade of Prophethood which is related to the sky. However, the caliphate is related to the sky through the Prophet. For he was the source of its spirit as he was the source of the text concerning it.
As for the holiness of the second kind of caliphate, it is natural and constant as that of Prophethood itself. In other words each of the successors appointed according to the textual nomination was the holiest and the best figure of all people.
In the past, the matter of the succession to authority was the reason for creating violent riot among the Muslims, and was a source of many sorrowful tragedies in the history of Islam. Moreover, such a matter was not easy or possible at that time, for the people were stubborn. We think that it is nowadays easy and possible to bring the two parties together to accept a moderate idea. Thus they are able to discard disagreement, to adopt obligatory brotherhood, and to incline to righteousness.
That is what Muslims should take into consideration, namely they should take care of the essence, and they should discard nonessential things. They should take care of the true religion and should discard purposes. The Muslim should cling to the true Islam to please Allah. In the meantime, tribalism, feelings, and effects should not deceive him.
The matter of the religion, that is the relation between the servant and his Lord and is the start on which his final result in the hereafter is based, is unlike the worldly matters. For the latter are liable, in many of their relations, to desires, and environmental customs. Furthermore they are liable to man's, inclinations, tribalism, and effects.
As for the true Muslim, he takes care of his pure true religion.
Now, we, in the subject of the succession to authority, want to reunite Muslims to follow the true religion that is far above the foregoing things.
So the Shi'ite person must recognize the succession to authority (of the first kind) as it was on the day when it occurred. He must recognize that it is general supreme authority for Muslims, and that it is worthy of praise because of its many effects in Islam.
Also the Sunni person must recognize the succession to authority as it is. For it is a means between him and the Prophet to understand his religion. It is the fact which the authentic books (al-Sihah) have successively mentioned through various Prophetic traditions. Noteworthy it is not correct for us to discuss scientifically these traditions. For they have been reported through the best ways to which the Muslim resort to adopt his religion.
Then in this way the two parties are able to solve their main differences without injustice and selfishness. [3]
This research is concerning one of the successors who was appointed according to the textual nomination. However, his succession to authority was unique in the history of Islam. That is because his father designated him to be the successor after him. Then the people pledged allegiance to him after the death of his father, peace be on him.
So al-Hasan was among the first kind (of the caliphs), for he was elected. Meanwhile he was the successor to authority through the textual nomination, for the word `Imam' indicates that.
In chapter three, we have mentioned an example of the texts concerning the nomination of al-Hasan and a quick study about the way of his election and the allegiance the people pledged to him.
When al-Hasan, peace be on him, declared his final attitude, between the doctrine and supreme authority, towards Mu'awiya, he meant nothing but his right to authority. For the people elected him. Moreover, Allah had chosen him to be successor, and the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, had affirmed that through his traditions. That is because no one had the right to change or alter this right, as we have previously said. Rather this right was among the unchangeable orders of Allah.
Also the hardships and the disasters that hit al-Hasan during the time of his succession do not indicate that he was a mere Imam. Rather they indicate that he was an Imam with an army and supreme authority.
No change included al-Hasan, nor did a disaster harm him during his Imamate. So he was like the Qur'an in authority.
The disagreement of the people, their disobedience, and their alienation did not harm the Qur'an. For it is the supreme authority of Muslims. It is far above falsehood. It is as it is in leading people. It is as it is in maintaining the Words of Allah. So the people do not harm it whether they accept it or refuse it, act according to its guidance or disobey it, yield to its leadership or deny it.
Such was the Imamate of al-Hasan, peace be on him.
Both the Qur'an and al-Hasan are two main elements in Islam as both law and supreme authority are two main elements in the community with the constitutional regime.
Concerning the two main elements in Islam, I (i.e., the author) mean by that what the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, denoted in his authentic or successive holy tradition when he said: "I am going to leave behind me among you two things which, if you cleave to them, you will never go astray that is the Book of Allah and my offspring from my family (Ahl al-Bayt). They will never scatter (from you) until they lead you to me at the (sacred) waters (of Heaven)." [4]
Al-Hasan was among the Prophet's family at that time. He was the string of the necklace and the Imam of the people. He was the center of the circle in Islam. The Owner of the message (i.e., the Prophet) appointed him as successor for Muslims as he appointed the Qur'an as high authority for them.
I (i.e., the author) wonder: is the Imamate a thing other than this?
Think of al-Hasan, peace be on him, when you speak about reality. Then you will know that he conformed to the Words of Allah. Thus his qualities were the Qur'an, the Imamate, the two valuable things (al-thaqalan, i.e., Allah's Book and the Prophet's family), Paradise, righteousness, preventing bloodshed, and fulfilling the covenant.
Now, consider carefully the traits of the enemy of al-Hasan. They were greediness, trickery, discord, bribery, breaking the covenants, money, vanities, waging war, making raids, and the like.
It is this bad life that forced al-Hasan to dispute with Mu'awiya over the succession to authority.
Yes, al-Hasan was the (grand) son of the Apostle of Allah. He was an Imam, then what was the importance of the life in this world, of money, and of vanities?
Al-Hasan is the Lord of the youth of Heaven, as his grandfather, may Allah bless him and his family, described him. All Muslim groups have narrated this tradition on the authority of the Prophet. Also this tradition is as authentic and successive as the Qur'an that is the deepest and most eloquent of all the words of human beings.
Concerning this tradition, we want to say: In this tradition, why was al-Hasan not described as the Lord of the youth of the world? Was he not the Lord of the youth in this world, in merits, and noble deeds?
(Al-Hasan) from Hashim's (tribe), ascending to the sky,
Which made the people die of envy with its high position.
Allah refused (anything) to be for the people (i.e., the Hashimites)
However, the noble deeds of the religion and of the world without a limit.
So in this tradition, why was al-Hasan ascribed to Heaven?
Today, the person does not pay attention to this question. For he thinks that al-Hasan, whom Allah had chosen, is the Lord of the youth of Heaven, and that is enough. In other words such a person does not pay attention to the relationship between al-Hasan's supremacy and the world. That is because the tradition has been on everybody's lips for fourteen centuries. Namely, the people narrate it more than any other tradition on every occasion. So the people understand nothing from it but that al-Hasan and al-Husayn are the two Lords of Heaven, paying no attention to the foregoing question.
I (i.e., the author) wonder: Did the people understand the tradition on the day when the Prophet said it?
Yes, the Prophet called his two (grand) sons the two Lords of Heaven. For he wanted to indicate that they were not appropriate for this world full of treason and desertion. Namely, he wanted to indicate that they were not appropriate for the restless youth of that time, for they got used to hypocrisy and breaking the covenants. Generally speaking, the youth of that time were inappropriate for seeking protection with these two Lords, nor were they suitable for them. Therefore al-Hasan and al-Husayn, peace be on them, were the two Lords of the youth of Heaven. For the latter fulfilled the covenant they made with Allah. Thus Allah settled them in His chosen abode. He has removed malice from their hearts and seated them on facing beds.
Al-Hasan is the Lord of the youth of Heaven, and that is enough.
In other words, the supremacy of al-Hasan and of al-Husayn will prevail a world better than this world, and people better than these people. That is because the youth of the world refused to give them their right, mutinied against them, and denied their supremacy.
Then this world has deprived itself of their blessing, their favor, and their guidance.
Also the traitorous youth of this world have drawn on themselves shame, regret, the shame of history, and the torture of the hereafter.
Moreover, the tradition, according to this concept, is a prophetic epic. It shows the unseen from behind the unseen. It refers, through brief epics, to what the two Lords of the youth of Paradise suffered from the youth of the world. It gives the two Lords their profitable share.
Without a doubt, the person who was the Lord of Paradise or the Lord of its youth was the Lord of all the world.
The Lord of prophets, may Allah bless him and his family, had his own eloquent words. The great talented people were unable to compete with him. That is very clear in his short words which have been mentioned through the authentic chains of reporters (asanid). Then the eloquent words of the Prophet are regarded as a miracle in the vast Arabic language. The excellent feature in the Prophetic eloquent words, though short, is that they imply many meanings. They sometimes have clear meanings, and sometimes have hints. From here, the Prophet's eloquent words referred to many true miraculous predictions.
These eloquent words themselves are proofs for the authenticity of the Prophetic tradition.
Among the traditions of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, concerning the textual nomination of his holy two (grand) sons al-. Hasan and. al-Husayn, peace be on him, is: "They (i.e., al-Hasan and al-Husayn) are two Imams, whether they rise or sit." If you consider carefully the surface structure of this tradition, you will understand nothing but the declaration concerning the two lords, namely al-Hasan and al-Husayn. Then if you consider carefully the deep structure of the tradition, you will understand that the Prophet hinted to the behavior of these two Imams. Namely, the deep structure of the tradition indicates that one of them will rise and the other will sit. Besides it indicates that one of them or they both will rise one time and sit other time. Therefore, they both were two Imams, and no one has the right to oppose them in spite of their two different attitudes.
No one in Islam understood the predictions of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, than his (grand) son and successor, al-Hasan b. 'Ali. For al-Hasan understood what his grandfather meant by these two traditions, and by many other traditions.
Besides, al-Hasan was the most appropriate person for clinging to the Prophet's predictions. Thus he took the methods of his life and his death from them.
Was al-Hasan not the (grand) son of that Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family? Was he not the inheritor of his qualities? Was he not his trustee of authority over his community? Noteworthy, al Hasan suffered from his community as the Prophet suffered from his community when he propagated his message. Thus al-Hasan said as the Prophet said then: "O Allah! Guide my people, for they do not know."
Moreover, al-Hasan inherited noble qualities from the Prophet. Through them he was able to lead all Muslims in the world of Islam. Through them he was In. no need of the material force, wealth, and supreme authority. For these noble qualities themselves were forces, wealth, and supreme authority.
Accordingly, it was not important when Mu'awiya disobeyed al-Hasan, and when `Ubayd Allah and the Kufans deserted him. For his holy relation with the Prophet did not desert him, nor did his obligatory Imamate betray him, nor did his obligatory love transgress against him.
Besides, the limited supreme authority is worthless in comparison with the unlimited spiritual authority.
Neither failure nor death was able, even for a day, to end those high spiritual qualities. Hence history has admired them. Besides the hearts of the Muslims have clung to them. The aggressors and the ungrateful deniers did not prevent those qualities from blossoming. Up till now, they have increased in greatness to complete their strait immortal way.
` We have known the close relation between al-Hasan and the Prophet who was the source of good for mankind during its evil times, of guidance for the Muslims during the times of discords and going astray, and of blessing of the world during aridity and deprivation. Apart from this, we have known that al-Hasan was the (grand) son of the Apostle of Allah, the Lord of the youth of Paradise, and the Imam who shared the Qur'an its Imamate.
Still, we must pay much more intention to understand the words al-Hasan himself said to explain his attitude, namely between supreme authority and the doctrine.
Also we must give brief examples of al-Hasan's many words which have been narrated through various chains of reporters (asania). That is because we want to conclude his eloquent hints, for they are of great importance to guide us to a decisive decision about the subject.
Now, we have to study the personal declarations of al-Hasan, for such declarations are very important in achieving our special subject.
Al-Hasan answered the blaming question of Sulayman b. Sirt al-Khaza'i whom b. Qutayba described as the Lord of the Iraqis and their leader. [5] In response to this question, al-Hasan, peace be on him, said: "If I had worked hard and exerted my self firmly for the supreme authority and life in this world, then Mu'awiya would have not been braver than me. However, my opinion is different from yours." [6]
Some of al-Hasan's enemies were pleased to hurt him though they were safe of him. Among them was `Abd Allah b. al-Zubayr, who showed enmity towards the family of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his family. In response to `Abd Allah, al-Hasan, peace be on him, said: "You claim that I have handed over the supreme authority. Woe unto you! That is impossible. I am the son of the bravest of all Arabs. I am the son of Fatima, the mistress of the women of the world. I have not done that, woe unto you, out of cowardice or weakness. However, those who are like you pledged allegiance to me, asked me to rise, and flattered me. Nevertheless, I do not rely on their support." [7]
The following is another short declaration of his. Though the declaration is short, it is the most eloquent and important one in this respect. It was an answer to his brother al-Husayn when he asked him: "What made you hand over authority ?" So al-Hasan said:" The thing that had made your father hand it over before me." [8]
I (i.e., the author) say: These few examples are enough to indicate that the friends and the enemies subjected the Imam to a difficult test, but he passed the test successfully.
When we analyze the ideas of the Imam in this respect, we will find that they contain the following main elements:
1. Al-Hasan did not act to obtain the life in this world.
2. If he had acted to obtain the life in this world, he would have been stronger than his enemies. Besides his plans in life would have been other than these plans.
3. He adopted his attitude while he had neither self-weakness nor weak policy nor cowardice. Rather he did not find loyal supporters. Namely, he would have won a victory over his enemies if he had found loyal supporters.
4. His only objective was to follow his father's example. It is noteworthy that his father kept silent when his right to authority was illegally usurped. In other words he kept silent to protect Islamic spirits and beliefs from dying out.
The signs of the spiritual Imamate appear clearly among the elements of the above- mentioned four points. These signs did not mix with weakness, nor did they have any relation to any retreat or recoiling. However, they were the strength that moved al-Hasan to act to please his Lord. So he was in no need of acting to obtain the life in the world. Besides the life in this world was not like these signs, nor were they like it. Such was the true Imamate. It was the shadow of Prophethood in the meaning that related to the sky. Prophethood did not happen in the earth on the day when Allah wanted it to happen but through the loyal supporters. Also the Imamate did not occur when Allah wanted it to occur but through the loyal supporters. However, there was a great difference between the supporters of Prophet and those of the Imam. For the supporters of the Imam cajoled him and asked him for the inheritance. They pledged allegiance to him to obey him in an absolute manner, but they deserted him, paying no attention to him.
Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his family, was an apostle; the apostles had passed away before him. Thus his (grand) son, al Hasan, was an Imam whose heart was full of belief and whose tongue uttered ideal words. This was the message which was wanted for him, and for which he was wanted.
Al-Hasan, peace be on him, was afflicted by a critical situation. Also his grandfather, the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, was afflicted by the same situation. That was on the day (Expedition) to al-Hudaybiya and the Banu (sons of) Ashja`. Al Hasan was deserted by his companions as his father, peace be on him, was deserted on the day of the Shelter (al-Saqifa) and on the day of the Consultation (al-Shura). [9] So al-Hasan had to follow these examples of his father and of his grandfather. Also he had to achieve his acts according to their practices (Sunna). Besides there was no shortcoming in what the third one of these two great ones did.
Concerning the second point, we say: Indeed, al-Hasan b. 'Ali (peace be on them) took upon himself that he would use his talents, his life, his history, his political entity, his patience, and his strength to serve his doctrine and to immortalize his character and his word. Through his great step with which he ended his attitude (i.e., between the doctrine and supreme authority), al-Hasan was the Imam who abstained from the life in this world, and the caliph who accepted the responsibility from the people to establish human ideals among people.
So all al-Hasan's deeds were ideals for tentative leaders.
Al-Hasan refused the life in this world though it came to him willingly. In other words he refused to accept authority, wealth, influence, and pleasures. All these temptations cost him nothing. Rather they were ready to obey him, to serve him, and to cling to him.
If al-Hasan had done that, preferred that to his own doctrine, "become resolute, and exerted himself for that," he would have been, without doubt, the worthiest one of winning the foregoing things, for he was at that time the Imam who had the best lineage in the history of humanity. Besides he had the greatest Imamate in history.
However, if al-Hasan had been a worldly man, then he had to abandon his ancestry, his education, and his spiritual qualities. He had to be a person other than al-Hasan b. 'Ali, b. Fatima, and the (grand) son of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family. In this way he would have been able to satisfy greed, to gather supporters, and to bribe the restless. That is because, his vast empire, at that time, had a lot of land taxes that were able tempt the leaders of that generation and "the children of the houses of the opportunists." Accordingly, all hypocrites would have been good believers, all traitors would have been loyal trustees, and the restless would have been obedient subjects. Therefore all people would have been false while they did not know that.
Besides `Amr b. al-`As, al-Mughira b. Shu'ba, Ziyad b. Abih, and their followers would have sought protection with al-Hasan in Kufa. There would have been no difference between them and Hujr b. `Adi, Qays b. Sa'd, and `Adi b. Hatam. So they (the former group) sought protection with Mu'awiya there. They hated al-Hasan because he was indifferent to the world. They hated his noble traits when they sought protection with him. Meanwhile they liked the traits of Mu'awiya, his history, his lineage, and his fabrications.
If al-Hasan had clung to the world, his matter would have been successful. So there would have been no need to write about it, to go into it, and to waste our time in it.
The ignoble Kufans looked for ambitions not for facts. That is because they lived during the lifetime of al-Hasan. They followed him, trusted him, and yielded to him, for they thought that his treasuries would be opened to buy their consciences, his states would be ready to response to the gluttony of their prominent figures, and his policy would please their psychological desires all over his Muslim countries. Generally speaking, they thought that al-Hasan would meet their party purposes and their worldly ambitions. Noteworthy, among the Kufans were rightly-guided people. They were the followers (Shi `a) of his father. They turned away from the life in this world during their firm attitude alongside him and his father, who divorced the life in this world three times.
Those true believing Kufans supported al-Hasan, for they knew that he was the grandson of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family.
Now, what do you think of this discussion? Do you think that Mu'awiya was able to resist al-Hasan or to win a victory over him? According to this study, which one of them was worthier of weakness al-Hasan or Mu'awiya?
In the light of this explanation, we understand the meaning of the words of al-Hasan: "If I had worked hard and exerted my self firmly for supreme authority and the life in this world, then Mu'awiya would have not been braver than me. However, my opinion is different from yours.
Yes, al-Hasan would have been braver than Mu'awiya if he had wanted the life in this world.However, Imam al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on them, was a human being other than Mu'awiya.
Al-Hasan did not appear in this world except during counted periods of time when the people learned ideals from his noble qualities and got happiness from his excellent pure guidance.
Al-Hasan understood the special meaning of honor. He understood that it was a mixture of self- respect and the interests of the religion. He thought that authority, money, and worldly pleasures did not belong to honor.
Al-Hasan was infallible as the Book says. His heart was full of ideals. These two qualities made him turn away from the desires of the transient authority. Meanwhile they made him cleave to Allah, His Books, His Apostles, and the Judgment Day. So the worldly man either overlooks those people or is angry with them.
Al-Hasan did not want to win the attitude through these dishonest ways, for he regarded such a kind of winning as a great lost in the life in this world.
If he had followed these dishonest ways, then he would have gotten rid of the ideal natures which the hand of the Prophet had planted in him through his prophetic education.
Was it possible for al-Hasan to get rid of those natures while they were some organs of his body? Was it possible for him to work hard and to exert all strength while he was the (grand) son of the Apostle of Allah, his foster son, and a student of his school?
Were it not for the life in this world was a field to spread his message, the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, would be indifferent to it.
So al-Hasan had to be a mirror to reflect his grandfather's good qualities. Those good qualities were fixed in him because of the nature which was imposed on him through his grandfather's education, his faith, and his environment. However, that was in the field of his Imamate. Such was al-Hasan. He was a good example for people, for he was far above weakness cowardice, and defects. He was the mirror that reflected the Prophet's renunciation from worldly pleasures, his noble traits, for he was "the most similar of all people to the Prophet in form, ethics, policy, and management."
So where are the weak points which the quick critics have mentioned concerning al-Hasan?
Those who have criticized the policy of al-Hasan, peace be on him, have forgotten the critical situation his supporters made. They have forgotten the irregularity of these supporters. They have forgotten that this irregularity resulted from the events which were imposed on al Hasan, namely they resulted from the development of life from the third generation after the lifetime of the Prophet. Besides the people, or most of them, abandoned piety and inclined to ambitions and pleasures. Therefore, the crime resulted from the condition of al Hasan, and the treason belonged to the people who lived during his time. In other words, nobody has the right to blame al-Hasan for what he had done.
Also those who have criticized al-Hasan's policy have forgotten that the final result of such an attitude, of such a condition, and of such society took place because of the people who were hypocrites and liars by nature while al-Hasan always thought about loyalty and the truth.
For this reason, we think that the measures which al-Hasan took during his critical situation were the most skillful of all measures in solving the matter, the most wonderful of them in policy, the most accurate of them in idea, and the most appropriate of them for the behavior of the Imam.
In these chapters of us, we have discussed the reason why al Hasan, peace be on him, has been blamed. We have mentioned each of them in a suitable subject and we have given it a correct irrefutable answer derived from the time when al-Hasan lived.
In this way al-Hasan, peace be on him, declared his great reformatory uprising. He turned the battle, based on discords and weapons, into summons to good manners, peace, and reform. Suddenly, he became the greatest reformer in the field of reform, and the most tentative and successful leader in the field of perfection.
Besides he became the Imam of all the world, though he had no throne.
Is Islam not this angelic spirit which the material world does not overcome, and which vain desires and false imaginations do not humiliate?
Al-Hasan looked at the majority of his companions. He was displeased with them, for they neglected their obligations, turned away from ethics, separated from their right, and joined the camp of his enemies. Moreover, the evil discord, which the counted traitors created, destroyed that helpless people. It divided them, weakened their classes, and made them, at a short time, parties. They drew plans and got ready to wage war against each other.
Accordingly, was there a hope of the companions who were more harmful than their enemies?
Why didn't the Imam, who was the deputy of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and his family), say his word that was similar to the Prophet's word in mercy and nobility? Why did he not say his word that was neutral between the two fighting parties to be far above them all?
Isn't the true Imam a thing above all people?
[1] Ta'rikh al-Islam al-Siyasiya, vol. 1, p. 396.
[2] Ard' al-Mu'tazila al-Siyasiya, p. 15. Al-Alwah (Magazine), no. 11, first year. Most Mu'tazilites agreed with the Shi'a and said: "No Imamate but through the text and nomination.
[3] It is an act of kindness to mention that one of those who plagiarize the ideas of the people had published this solution without ascribing it to its owner. The man was among our listeners, on more than one occasion, when we presented this idea as an example in this book.
[4] Al-Hakim (vol. 3, p. 148) has narrated it and said: "This tradition is of authentic isnad (chain of witnesses) according to the condition of the two Shaykhs (i.e., Abu Bakr and "Umar [Ed. This is absolutely incorrect; the twy shaykhs refer to al-Bukhari and Muslim])." Al-Dhahabi has reported it in `Talkhis al-Mustadrak', admitting its correctness according to the condition of the two Shaykhs. Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal has narrated it in `al-Musnad, pp. 17 and 26. Also this tradition has been reported by Ibn Abi Shayba, Abu Ya`la, b. Sa'd in 'al-Kanz', vol. 1, p. 47, and the like.
[5] Ibn Qutayba al-Dinawari, al-Imama wa al-Siyasa, p. 151.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Al-Bayhaqi, al-Mahasin wa al-Masawi', vol. 1, p. 60-5.
[8] Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 10, p. 113.
[9] As for the day of the Shelter (al-Saqifa), it has been mentioned at a great length in many books. As for the day of the Consultation (al-Shura), it has been presented in the best manner by 'Ali, peace be on him, when he said to the Consultative Committee at that time: "You have certainly known that I am the most rightful of all others for the Caliphate. By Allah, so long as the affairs of Muslims remain intact and there is no oppression in it save on myself I shall keep quiet seeking reward for it (from Allah) and keeping aloof from its attractions and allurements for which you aspire." (Imam 'Ali, Nahj al-Balagha, p. 102.)

Chapter 13

Sacrifice
Al-Hasan broke the record when he yielded to this nobility. For no one of great figures have done that. Al-Hasan was able to yield to that noble attitude through the Divine qualities such as strength, patience, renouncing worldly pleasures, and the like.
The sacrifice in the way of Allah takes place when the person is righteous, namely when he is far away from doubts, flatters, tricks, hypocrisy, and the like. Besides the person should carry out the greater struggle (al-jihad al-akbar) to destroy his personal inclinations and to oppose his human nature. That happens when he suppresses his material selfish disobedience.
Such was the Divine Imamate, and such was the Divine Imam.
Al-Hasan's situation was inappropriate for achieving a victory over falsehood. Thus it was incumbent on him to wait for a better situation to establish the truth.
Al-Hasan's situation became obvious when he knew the intentions of the people. For they declared their readiness to fight alongside him while they wanted to achieve their ambitions.
Taking the reins of government was the only way to prevent Mu'awiya from showing enmity towards the true Islam. . So it was necessary for the choice from the family of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and his family, and the loyal rest from the party of Allah to abdicate authority to protect Islam from Mu'awiya, and the Syrians. That is because Mu'awiya spread his fifth column in the core of Kufa and at the Camp of Imam al-Hasan. So the evil band seized the opportunity to achieve its aims in the life in this world through its desires, its ambitions, its harm, and its defects. In this way al-Hasan was able to hand over the authority to preserve his spiritual doctrines with glory, strength, wideness, greatness, and immortality.
The (grand) son of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, had no shortcoming when he was far above the material desires, and left the life in this world for those who wanted it. He had no defect when he stood alone in the authority of spirit. Thus his great position was steadfast. The standards of his Imamate were raised. His ideal doctrines were known. His traits in struggle (jihad), patience, and sacrifice were laudable.
The Muslim who takes care of his Islam and his true faith should not make mistakes in his affair. He should not neglect his right. He should not forget the relation between him and the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family. Moreover, he should not ignore his Imamate. That was the Divine Imamate that did not accept any change nor did it imply any weakness and desertion. Rather it was the victorious Imamate in spite of the hostile traitorous attempts. It was the Imamate that became strong through the might of Allah. It became steadfast through the steadfastness of the truth. Moreover, it has become outspread among generations as Prophethood has become outspread among nations. This Imamate has glory and strong respect in the full sense of the word. Meanwhile it urges the people to scorn the conceit of the enemies.
That stage was critical in the history of Islam. For it led to the separation between the true caliphate and supreme authority (i.e., between the religious Imamate and supreme authority), and between the temporal power and spiritual authority.
Apparently, the early Muslims did not know this separation during the lifetime of the Prophet. Rather the Muslims after the death of the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family, knew that gradually. Then the religious rulers yielded to this separation and regarded it as a reformatory obligatory way when they feared for the entity of Islam (baydat al-Islam).
To be quite frank with you about this matter, I (i.e., the author) say: Indeed, Imam al-Hasan took an attitude towards Mu'awiya as his father, the Commander of the faithful, peace be on him, did towards Abu Bakr and his two companions (i.e., `Umar and `Uthman). This was the meaning of the words of al-Hasan when his brother al Husayn, peace be on him, asked him: "What made you hand over the authority?" "The thing that had made your father hand it over before me," replied al-Hasan.
Each of the two Imams (i.e., al-Hasan and al-Husayn), during his special condition, had his own sacrifice through which he preserved Islam.
According to this rule, al-Hasan erased the map of his material kingdom from the earth to draw instead the map of his spiritual greatness in both the earth and the sky. Then al-Hasan turned to the borders of his kingdom in the new immortal authority. Suddenly, they were the borders between the kingdom of the truth and the kingdom of falsehood, between ideal humanity and tyrannical selfishness. Such were the spiritual qualities of the Imam. He lived and died, while the words of Allah were on his tongue. He used to say:
"Perform the prayers." "Give alms (zakat)" "Fasting has been written on you as it had been written on those who were before you." "Pilgrimage to the House is incumbent on men for the sake of Allah, (upon) every one who is able to undertake the journey to it." Now, the following are the material qualities of the tyrant (i.e., Mu'awiya), who said to the people openly: "By Allah, I have not fought against you to make you pray, nor to fast, nor to make the pilgrimage, nor to pay alms (zakat). I fought against you so that I might have power over you and Allah has given that to me when you were reluctant to (obey) Him."
The people grew accustomed to receive such an event as they received the great shock from the events of the time. That is because they depended on the worldly narrow meaning of the events so that they found nothing in them save loss.
As for the person with good calm self, he regarded the events as means for achieving the aims that were dearer than authority and the entire world. Nevertheless, these aims have been written in history to be glorified for all people.
In this way al-Hasan was victorious through his jihad, his patience, and his sacrifice. These three qualities are the mother of all virtues.
Also al-Hasan had other traits that were proofs for his greatness and his outstanding merits.
Al-Hasan overcame the people with his Imamate, his obligatory love, and his sonship to the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family.
The people who distressed al-Hasan were his supporters, his enemies, and his wife.
As we have already said, he was singled out with an excellent kind of jihad, a great kind of patience, and a unique kind of sacrifice.
Now, we must understand these three talents in particular. For they were Hasanid qualities that had unquestionable aspects. So I (i.e., the author) say:
1. As for his jihad (holy war), it was the most wonderful of all kinds of jihad, most painful of them to the self, the greatest of them in the battlefield, and the longest of them in troubles.
Al-Hasan waged jihad in the way of Allah in many fields, not in one field. He waged jihad against his enemy when he advanced against him. He made every effort to settle the discords and to reform his companions and his soldiers. However, all his efforts went in vain. He struggled against himself to control its emotions, to suppress its ambitions, and to repulse its power. No leader of the people was able to control himself, his nerves, and his emotions as al-Hasan did during the attitudes from which he suffered. He tried hard to convince his loyal followers (Shi'a) when he endured their intense censure because of the Peace Treaty he made with Mu'awiya. Towards them, he took an attitude. The attitude indicated his angelic excellent qualities. In the mean time it indicated that he was an infallible Imam. That was when he controlled his anger, and possessed himself. That was when he treated them with calmness, soft words, and patience.
Al-Hasan gave each of his followers a clear correct answer. He discovered their aims concerning what they had blamed him for. Thus he was able to uproot their blame. So al-Hasan affected his followers with his skillful proof, splendid purpose, and his genuine idea. Through the attitudes of their Imam al-Hasan, they remembered the attitudes of Prophets. Moreover, they collected his sayings as they collected the traditions of the Prophet, for they regarded them as the traditions of the Prophet.
The following is an example of al-Hasan's answers to one of his followers when he asked him: "(Grand) son of the Apostle of Allah, why have you concluded a truce with Mu'awiya and made peace with him? Don't you know that the right to (authority) is for you, not for him? Don't you know that Mu'awiya is straying and oppressive?"
"Abu Said, am I not the proof of Allah, the Exalted, over His creatures and Imam (leader) over them after my father?" asked al Hasan. "Yes," replied Abu Said. "Isn't (the following) what the Apostle of Allah said to me and my brother: "Al-Hasan and al Husayn are two Imams whether they rise or sit?" asked al Hasan. "Yes," answered Abu Said. Al-Hasan said: "Therefore, I am an Imam when I rise, and I am an Imam when I sit."
Then al-Hasan, peace be on him, added: "Abu Said, the reason for my making peace with Mu'awiya is that the Apostle of Allah had made peace with the banu (sons of) Damrah, the banu of Ashja`, and the Meccans when he left al-Hudaybiya. Those were unbelievers according to the Holy Qur'an. However, Mu'awiya and his companions are unbelievers according to the interpretation (of the Qur'an).
"Abu Said, if I am an Imam (appointed) by Allah, may His name be Exalted, then why do you stultify my idea concerning what I have done? Do you not know that you should obey me when I conclude a truce or wage war even if the meaning of wisdom is vague for you? Do you not know that when al-Khidr (Elijah) tore the ship, killed the boy, and built the wall, Musa (Moses) became indignant with his acts, for the meaning of wisdom was ambiguous for him till al-Khidr told him (about that), so Musa became satisfied? Such is I. You have become indignant with me because you have no knowledge of the meaning of wisdom. Were it nor for what I have done, all my followers (Shi'a) on the surface of the earth would be killed." [1]
I (i.e., the author) say: Al-Hasan waged another Kind of jihad against another group of people, they were the Umayyads themselves. We will refer to this kind of jihad soon.
These kinds of jihad were in five fields. Al-Hasan, peace be on him, ended his holy life in them, endured their troubles with steadfastness strength and excellent patience.
Al-Hasan's jihad included all fields.
When al-Hasan handed over his right to authority, he wanted to wage another kind of jihad in the way of Allah, namely he wanted to preserve Islam, to facilitate the life of Muslims, and to protect them from killing. In all these efforts, he overlooked his right to authority to wage jihad in the way of Allah. In other words he sold his life to Allah to buy His Heaven.
2. As for his patience, it was the echo of his jihad, and the stronghold to which he resorted in his various fields.
The people persecuted al-Hasan with deprivation of his right to authority, treason, desertion, plots, hypocrisy, assassination, breaking the covenants, slanders, insults, deviation from the truth, and censure for making peace with Mu'awiya. No leader in history suffered these black tribulations and painful disasters except al-Hasan, for they attacked him from all directions.
Still, al-Hasan, peace be on him, bore them with peerless patience.
Also he treated all his critical situations with his excellent wisdom and cleverness. In other words he treated them gradually from beginning to end. He did not yield to anger, nor was affected by emotions, nor did he surrender to the events, nor was restless because of the disturbances. Nothing shook him. Rather he was eager to support the religion, the words of the Qur'an, and the message of Islam.
Such was al-Hasan as Allah created him. No one denies these qualities of al-Hasan but the obstinate ignorant person or the discriminating enemy. His qualities during his time were ideal. He showed exemplary generosity in dealing with the people. His enemies and his companions were witnesses of his sweet words, his strong proof, his respect, his clemency, and his intellect.
Mu'awiya praised al-Hasan when he debated with him about the succession to authority. Also he flattered him on occasions other than these debates.
One day Mu'awiya flattered al-Hasan's sweet words as follows: "The most lovable person in talking to me is al-Hasan b. 'Ali." [2]
Al-Hasan was sometimes mentioned in the presence of Mu'awiya. Thus the latter said concerning the former: "They are the people whom Allah has inspired words." [3]
Concerning al-Hasan's prestige and good presence, Mu'awiya said: "By Allah, when I see him (al-Hasan), I hate his going away, and I am frightened by his blame." [4]
Also Mu'awiya said: "By Allah, when I see him (al-Hasan) sitting with me, I fear his prestige and his finding fault with me." [5]
Also Mu'awiya said praising al-Hasan:
As for al-Hasan, he was the son of him who was before him.
When he walks, death walks wherever he walks.
Does the lion not produce but the like of it
This is al-Hasan (who is) the like and peer of him.
However, if clemency and intellect is compared with a thing,
They would say (that) the thing was withered and perishable. [6]
Yes, such was Mu'awiya while he was the mortal enemy of al-Hasan. As for Marwan b. al-Hakam, he said concerning al-Hasan, peace be on him: "Indeed, his (i.e., al-Hasan's) clemency is as great as the mountains." [7]
These two enemies of al-Hasan affected praise towards him. This is a proof for his high social position among the people. Meanwhile this praise indicates that these two enemies yielded to the accomplished fact or they used such praise as a curtain to destroy their opponent.
The important encyclopedias are full of debates which we have previously mentioned. Mu'awiya became active through these debates during his disagreement with al-Hasan when the latter went to Sham (Syria), after the Treaty of Peace, or when the former went to Medina.
Mu'awiya gathered his strong loyal companions or his close relatives to debate with the members of the House (Ahl al-Bayt), peace be on them, about various matters. Through these debates he tried to prevent the hearts of the people from inclining towards them. Among those whom Mu'awiya gathered were `Amr b. al-`As, `Utba b. Abu sufyan, `Amr b. `Uthman b. `Affan, al-Mughira b. Shu'ba, al-Walid b. 'Aqaba b. Abu Mi'yat, Marwan b. al-Hakam, `Abd Allah b. alZubayr, and Ziyad b. Abih. Mu'awiya sometimes added other persons to them. Then he summoned al-Hasan, peace be on him, to debate with the men of this party one by one. Thus he used every means possible to challenge al-Hasan to satisfy his desires. Therefore he plotted against al-Hasan through these debates.
Concerning al-Hasan, `Abd Allah b. Ja'far said: "He was like the hard rock which floods cannot shake, ibexes cannot reach, and arrows cannot reach." [8] Al-Hasan had an innocent heart, high spirit, and pure rites. These qualities of his did not match the qualities of Mu'awiya and his companions. So he said to them: "By Allah, if the banu (sons of) Umayya ascribed to feebleness in speaking, I would refrain from (debating with them), I make little of (them)."
Also al-Hasan gave them a proof of their increasingly obstinacy. Thus he forced them to declare their submission, their defeat, and their bewilderment.
Al-Hasan answered the Umayyads' questions through reviewing the traditions of the Prophet concerning his right to authority. So he gradually made them recognize his right and his father's.
Al-Hasan went on debating with the Umayyads till he exposed their abominable obscenity. He used neither lies nor obscenity as they did. Rather he refuted them one by one, namely he refuted their most prominent fundamentals such as their known lineage and their described ancestry. That is because the strongest challenge you use against your opponent is that you refute his conceit and his traits he regards as the base of his glory and his character.
In all these debates, al-Hasan was the strong victorious side, while the Umayyads were the defeated side.
The weakest of all the Umayyads in these debates was their leader (i.e., Mu'awiya) though he had material forces that obeyed his orders. He was displeased to see his brothers and cousins defeated at the end of every debate.
So Mu'awiya said to the Umayyads at that time: "I have already informed you (of the knowledge of al-Hasan). However, you refused (that) till you heard what made your house dark and spoiled your meeting."
Also he said to them: "I have previously told you that he (i.e., al Hasan) is among those whose opposition is unbearable."
Also he said to Marwan b. al-Hakam: "I had prevented you from (debating with) this man (i.e., al-Hasan), but you refused that. Stop debating with him, for your father was unlike his father, nor are you like him. You are the son of the expelled homeless one, while he is the (grand) son of the holy Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family. However, you are looking for a knife to kill yourself"
Mu'awiya Scolded and provoked `Amr b. al-`As. "His (i.e., al Hasan's) father stabbed you (with his sword), so you protected yourself with your testicles. For this reason, you are cautious of him (al-Hasan)."
At another meeting, Mu'awiya said to `Amr b. al-`As: "Do not match with the seas, for they flood you. Do not match with the mountains, for they bewilder you. So take a rest from the excuse."
Ibn al-Zubayr, who was among Mu'awiya's companions at that time, repented of his debate with al-Hasan, peace be on him. He apologized to him for that and said: "Abu Muhammad (i.e., al-Hasan), excuse me. No one forced me to debate with you but this (i.e., Mu'awiya). He wanted to excite enmity between us. So why haven't you refrained from me when I have no knowledge? That is because you are the members of the house whose nature is clemency and forgiveness."
It was difficult for Mu'awiya to hear `Amr b. al-`As apologizing to al-Hasan and declaring his defeat. So he said to him: "Indeed, he (i.e., al-Hasan) has given vent to the anxieties of my heart upon you when he has caused your killing. So you have become like the partridge in the claws of the falcon. He plays with you however he wishes. So I do not think that you will pride yourself on anybody after that."
B. al-`As, Marwan, and b. Sumayya debated with al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on him. At the end of the debate Mu'awiya said: "Amru spoke but he recoiled." Then Mu'awiya turned to Ziyad and said: "What made you debate with him (i.e., al-Hasan)? You were nothing but like the partridge in the claws of the falcon." So `Amr said (to Mu 'awiya):"Have you intended to (obtain anything) through us?" Mu'awiya said: "Therefore, I would be your partner in ignorance. Do I vie in glory with the man whose grandfather was the Apostle of Allah, who is the Lord of those who died and those who are still alive, and whose mother was Fatima, the chaste, and the mistress of the women of the worlds?" Then Mu'awiya said to `Amru: "By Allah, if the Syrians heard about him (al Hasan), then evil shame would hit me." So `Amr said: "He (i.e., al-Hasan) has retained you, but he ground Marwan and Ziyad as the quern grinds corn. He has trodden on them with his own foot as the expert monkey dealer does."
Then Ziyad said: "By Allah, he (i.e., al-Hasan) has done that. However, Mu'awiya refused (everything) but exciting enmity between them and us."
In this way b. al-Zubayr and Ziyad bore witness against Mu'awiya. They showed that the latter urged them to debate with al Hasan. Also (many people) bore witness to the answers of al-Hasan, peace be on him, to them. They said: "`Abd Allah b. `Abbas was alone with al-Hasan. So he kissed him between his two eyes and said: `Cousin, may I be your ransom, your sea (i.e., knowledge) was still abundant when you were attacking or debating with (them) till you vented my worries upon the sons (of Umayyad)." [9]
The texts of these debates have rhetorical forms and literary values. They are worthy of reviewing as an original Arabic heritage. They themselves indicate the correctness of their attribution to their owners. Moreover, their styles and forms give us a clear idea about the literature of debates during that time. However, we will not mention them here, for they are full of abuses through which the fabrication makers from the Umayyads obtained their purposes. However, they insulted themselves more than they insulted their enemy. Thus they were evildoers.
As we have already said that we will not mention these debates here. However, we will not neglect them concerning the matter of the patience of al-Hasan peace be on him. That is because many abuses resulted from them towards him. Still he resisted them patiently. Meanwhile he resisted the methods which Mu'awiya used against him and his followers (Shi'a). Namely, Mu'awiya substituted them for the battlefields as war of nerves.
Note that we will discuss aspects of Mu'awiya's cold war in the chapters that follow.
3. His sacrifice:
al-Hasan made a unique sacrifice to show his doctrine. That was when he abdicated his right to authority.To sacrifice the throne indicates that the owner of the throne denies himself more than he sacrifices himself. So self-denial for the doctrine was the clearest trait of al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on him, and the most wonderful means of his during his continuous jihad.
Thus self-denial is more painful than self-sacrifice.In the past, cleaving to the throne had more effect on those who were eager for authority than cleaving to the self and the doctrine. So many people sacrificed their lives for their throne, while very few people sacrificed their throne for their lives.
In history there are many ugly pictures of those kings who sacrificed their lives for their thrones, while they were not ready to sacrifice their thrones for their lives. From here we can conclude the difference between spiritual values and material ones. In other words, no king throughout history was read to abdicate the throne, but al Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on him.
Therefore, al-Hasan abdicated the throne, and sacrificed all his worldly pleasures for his doctrine. So there is no doubt about the intention of al-Hasan, his loyalty, his purpose for the interest of Muslims, and his great sacrifice for Allah. Besides his year was called the Year of Unity. This denotes that all the people in that year were in agreement on putting his ideas into effect.
This is the sign of his high prestige in the hearts of the Muslims and of his spiritual authority though he abdicated the throne.Because of this sacrifice, some great figures from al-Hasan's followers (Shi'a) blamed him for refraining from waging armed war (against Mu'awiya). However, no one of those who blamed him had doubt about the correctness of what the Imam did. For they knew that he carried out his religious obligations such as reforming the community, preventing their blood from shedding, and achieving their purposes.
In the chapter that follows, you will know that those who blamed al-Hasan for his attitude did not treat him with justice, and that the solution al-Hasan concluded to solve his last problems was the only solution that suited his critical condition.
Of the two sacrifices al-Hasan b. 'Ali, peace be on them, chose the more painful one in the self, the more effective one in the religion, the rarer one in history, and the more valuable one in the custom of the people. Thus he was not liable to doubts, criticism, and accusation. Of course, al-Hasan was far above doubts, criticism, and accusation, for he chose the severest attitude of all attitudes for himself, and the most useful one of them for other than him to please his Lord. Moreover, he was the divine person whom the people recognized. He was, according to the verses of the Book, free from all doubts, errors, and accusations.
Al-Hasan, peace be on him, did not take the life in this world into consideration. So he did not wish for it. Rather he waited for the reward from his Lord. He was eager to meet Him, and to obtain his laudable position near his parents and his grandfather, and his dignity through which they will ask Allah, the Great and Almighty, to make him nearer to Him.
Moreover, al-Hasan was not cowardly to fear death. Namely, he was not afraid of death when he abdicated his right to authority. I (i.e., the author) wonder: How did cowardice come to al-Hasan? Was his father not the lion of Allah and of His Apostle? Was his grandfather not the Apostle of Allah, may Allah bless him and his family? Was Shaykh al-Battaha' not his grandfather? Were Hamza and Ja'far, who are the two lords of martyrs, not his two great paternal uncles? Was his brother not the father of martyrs? Did he not have famous attitudes in various fields such as the day of the House (al-Dar), the day of Basrah, and the day of Mazlam Sabat? Was he not the one about whom Mu'awiya said: "If he walked, death walked wherever he walked?" Doesn't this witness of his enemies indicate his bravery?
Indeed al-Hasan sacrificed his right to authority when he abdicated the throne. This sacrifice is among the most wonderful signs of bravery if the people know.
Therefore al-Hasan was not desirous of death nor was he afraid?
There was nothing in the criteria of al-Hasan but his doctrines. He thought that there was nothing like them. So he sacrificed his right to authority to protect them (his doctrines) from the hostile people who were afraid of neither sooner shame nor later fire. He followed this plan to be far above the life in this world. He refused any kind of change, deviation, and inclination. He was the victorious person in the core of desertion, the conqueror in the core of defeat, and the winner in the core of the collapse.
Al-Hasan was pleased to lead a painful life. Also he was pleased to do good for others in all circumstances without any exploitation, preference, and monopoly. This is what only the notable reformers can achieve in history, and what Muslim educators look for to reform people and make them adopt authentic principles.
Many people served their doctrines through enduring disasters. However, no one of them was like al-Hasan, for disasters accompanied him till the last moment of his life.
Accordingly, al-Hasan, peace be on him, was the ideal Imam who occupied an important position through his idealism, and great reformer who sacrificed his right to authority to protect the doctrine.
Besides, he led the following steps through refraining from world pleasures during his life in this world, his patience throughout his life, and sacrificing his right to authority. These outstanding merits themselves were jihad in the way of Allah. For he has immortalized his doctrines through them.
[1] Al-Majlisi, Bihar al--Anwar, vol. 10, p. 101.
[2] Al-Ya'qubi, Ta'rikh, vol. 2, p. 202. Ibn Kathir, vol. 8, p. 39. [3] Ibn `Abd Rabbih, al-`Iqd al-Farid, vol. 2, p. 323.
[4] Al-Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 10, p. 116.
[5] Ibn Abu al-Hadid, Sharh Nahj al-Baligha, vol. 2, p. 101.
[6] Ibid. vol. 4, p. 73.
[7] Ibid. vol. 4, pp. S and 18.
[8] Al-Bayhaqi, al-Mahasin wa al-Masawi', vol. 1, p. 62.
[9] Al-Bayhaqi, al-Mahasin wa al-Masawi', vol. 1, pp. 59- 64.
Ibn `Abd Rabbih, al-`Iqd al-Farid, vol. 2, p. 323. Al-Majlisi, Bihar al Anwar, vol. 10, p. 116.
Concerning these debates, see the book `Nahj al-Balagha' by the author.