 |
|
Thul-Hijjah 15, 1329 1) Sunnis rely on every correct hadith to confirm
their concept of succession, be it mutawatir or nont. We rely on the authenticity
of this hadith in our argument against theirs simply because they themselves testify to
its authenticity, thus binding themselves to what they have considered to be binding. Our
own proof regarding succession from our viewpoint depends on its tawatur from our own
sources, as is obvious to everyone. 2) The claim that `Ali is the successor of the
Messenger of Allah (pbuh) only in his household is rejected due to the fact that whoever
believes that `Ali is the successor of the Messenger of Allah in his household also
believes that he is his successor among the public as well, and whoever denies his
succession over the public also denies his succession among his family. There is no way to
separate one from the other; so, why bring up a philosophy which runs contrary to the
consensus of all Muslims? 3) I cannot overlook your statement that this hadith
is revoked, which contradicts both reason and Shari`a, since in order to abrogate, a
statement has to be made before the effect of its precedent becomes manifest, as is clear
to everyone. The only pretext for abrogation here is the allegation that the Prophet
(pbuh) supposedly refrained from [publicly] expounding on the gist of this hadith. The
hadith itself proves that he, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his progeny,
did not refrain from doing so; rather, texts in this meaning are consecutive, supporting
one another. If we suppose that there is no text in the same meaning after this one, then
how can it be proven that the Prophet (pbuh) had changed his mind or refrained from its
enforcement? "They follow nothing other than their own whims and desires, after
guidance from their Lord has already come unto them (Qur'an, 53:23)," and peace be
with you. Sincerely: Sh
|
