After this declaration, another command was issued from the central Caliphate stating that the traditions about Uthman has excelled in number and has spread in all the corners of the Islamic cities. «When my letter reaches you, invite the people to narrate traditions about the virtues of the initial companions (of the Prophet) and the Caliphs. Do not keep with yourselves any tradition which has been narrated by the people about 'Abu- Turab' save that you bring for me the opposite of that about the companions. This is because, this kind of an affair is more lovable to me and pleases me more and vanquishes more the reasonings of Abu-Turab and his Shias and the matter of Uthman's virtues and his superiority is more severe for them!
The instructions contained in Muawiya's letter was read out to the people and what followed was fabricated traditions about the virtues of the companions (of the Holy Prophet). In this regard, people narrated traditions to a great extent such that they found their way on the pulpits of the Islamic cities and the teachers of the school in every house. Moreover, they taught these forged traditions to the children and youngsters and repeated them so often that they became accepted like the holy Quran. Very soon these traditions spread amongst the women and daughters in the house and the maid-servants and slaves. The male members of the house would listen to such traditions from the official pulpits and the sermons of Friday-prayers and after reaching home would divulge them to their family members and servants. This state continued for many years. Muawiya possessed Caliphate and ruled from 40 A.H. to 60 A.H.. During this lengthy period, the mammonists competed with each other and took precedence over the other in fabricating traditions. In this manner, numerous traditions appeared and a great deal of fabrications circulated. The jurists, the judges and the governor - generals were all involved in this affair and were preoccupied on this mission. Those who were involved more than the others were the deceitful and weak-faithed reciters of the Quran who used to outwardly manifest themselves to be people of worship and humility. They used to forge traditions just to derive some pleasure and favour from the governors, gain nearness to the ruling-power and derive benefit in the form of wealth and property. This state of affairs continued until the religious - minded and those who abstained from the falsehood received such false traditions. These people narrated the afore-said traditions in its true form and if they knew it to be false, they would neither divulge it nor have faith in it. 115
It is on the basis of such historical evidences that I always used to say, 'most of the things which exist in the Caliphate school as a faith and religion has in fact been fabricated during Muawiya's era,'
Abu Abdullah Ibrahim-ibn-Muhammad116 famous as "Naftovia" belonging to the fourth century narrates in his "Tariq" a matter which, from the view- point of purport is similar to the saying of Mada'eni. He has written:-
«Most of the false traditions which they have recounted about the virtues of the companions (of the Holy Prophet) have been fabricated during the period of Bani-Ummayid. In this manner, the speaker and fabricator of such traditions wanted to gain nearness to the ruling - power and draw the attention of the ruling Ummayids. By this, the Ummayids too wanted to degrade the Bani-Hashim. 117
Now, we shall examine a few examples of such traditions so that we perceive more the truthfulness of the saying of Mada'eni and Naftovia.
When the noble verse118 [Arabic text] was revealed and the Holy Prophet was commissioned to invite his near relatives - progeny of Abdul-Muttalib towards God and warn them, it was for the first time that he was publicly announcing his invitation from his private house. Up to that day i.e. a period of three years which passed from his appointment to the mission of Messengership, his prophetic message was enclosed in his house and only Ali (AS.) and Khadija were then following it.119 The verse was revealed and the Holy Prophet was given instructions to spread his invitation.
We have narrated the details of this incident in the previous lessons. Hazrat Ali-ibn-Abi Talib was living in the Holy Prophet's house. From the time when he passed the five years of age i.e. at the time of famine, the Holy Prophet took Ali (A.S.) under his guardianship. The Holy Prophet commanded Ali who was then a youth of thirteen to fifteen to cook one leg of a sheep and prepare one big bowel of mixed yogurt and water. The Bani-Hashim were invited. They were approximately forty in number. The Holy Prophet addressed them as such: «Allah has sent me with His Message in order that you recognize Him by His Oneness and recognize me by my Prophethood.» Thereafter, he added: 'Who amongst you is ready to help me in this affair so that he would be my brother, legatee and Caliph amongst you? All those present turned back. Only Imam Amir-ul- Mumineen who was the youngest of all, rose and said: 'O Messenger of Allah, «I will be your helper in this path.»
When this affair was thrice repeated the Holy Prophet said: 'He is my brother, legatee and Caliph amongst you. Listen to him and obey his commands. 120
This tradition has come down with authentic documents in the reliable books of history and hadith belonging to the Caliphate school. However, as mentioned before, Muawiya had given instructions not to narrate or mention anything about the excellence of «Abu-Turab» and his family-members and instead give accounts to the opposite effect. Thus, this tradition which has been one of the most explicit proofs of Hazra'ts outstanding position in accepting Islam revealing the explicit wording and the decisive command of the Holy Prophet about his Executorship and Caliphate should be shattered and something contrary to this effect forged.
In the original copies of the books of the Caliphate school, they have brought contradictions for this tradition from the first-hand transmitters:
A tradition which has been attributed to Ayesha has been narrated from her. We are unaware whether she has really said these words or that they have falsely been attributed to her.
The tradition is as follows:
When the verse [Arabic text] was revealed, the Holy Prophet summoned the sons of Abdul-Muttalib and said: 'O sons of Abdul-Muttalib! O my kinsmen! O Safiah, daughter of Abdul-Muttalib! O Fatemah daughter of Muhammad, fear Allah and serve Him. I cannot do anything for you. I am not the owner of anything from God's side to you! 121
These two traditions are contrary to each other. Now we should see which one of them is true and which one of them is false and what reasons can be set forth for the correctness of the first one or falsity of the other.
In the Caliphate school, Ayesha enjoys such a lofty position that she is placed as high as the fourth in rank after the Holy Prophet, Abu-Bakr and Omar. One of the reasons being that by making use of the traditions which they narrated in her name and the unalterable credibility which they earned from her name, they wanted to give the necessary matters to the Muslims.
Thus, a tradition narrated in the name of Ayesha but contrary to the recounted tradition of Amir-ul-Mumineen would be given priority in the Caliphate school of thought. For this reason, a tradition containing the virtues of Amir-ul-Mumineen (A.S.) has fallen from its worth and credibility.
We will evaluate two traditions from the view-point of the rules of 'Science of traditions'. The points which are worthy of attention here are as follows:-
Firstly, with regards to the consensus of all the Ulemas (scholars) of Islam, the verse being discussed has been revealed in the third year of the Holy Prophet's appointment. 122
Secondly, the narrator of the second tradition i.e. Ayesha was born in the fourth year of the Holy Prophet's appointment123 and hence could not have been a witness to the event of the tradition. Therefore the narrated tradition from Ayesha being a loose [Arabic text] tradition is creditless. On the other hand, the narrated tradition from Amir-ul-Mumineen is correct124 as far as its chain of transmission is concerned and is devoid of any doubt. Moreover, at the time of the occurance of the afore-said incident, he himself was fifteen years of age.
Thirdly, Hazrat Fatemah (A.S.) whose name has appeared in the text of the second tradition, stepped into this world as per the authentic sources125 in the fifth year of the Holy Prophet's appointment. Even if we accept the sayings of others (whose statements severely contradict each other) Fatemah had not yet reached the age of puberty and was at the most eight years old.
Thus under usual circumstances, she could not be the addressee to an official and religious address especially when she had three elder sisters living at that time and in case of necessity it was they who should have been addressed and not the youngest one who, even if we assume that she had been born at that time, could not have been more than eight years old.
In this regard, two lengthy traditions have come down from Abu-Huraira.
In the first tradition, Abu-Huraira says:-
«When the verse [Arabic text] was revealed, the Holy Prophet invited the Quraish. All of them gathered. The Holy Prophet addressed them as such": 'O the sons of Ka'ab-ibn-Luvi, save your near ones from the fire! 'O the sons of Murat-ibn-Ka'ab, deliver yourselves from the fire of Hell! 'O the sons of Abd-Munaf, save yourselves from the fire! 'O Bani-Hashim, save your near ones from the fire! 'O the sons of Abdul-Muttalib, deliver yourselves from the Hell and its fire!
Up to here, the Holy One speaks in a general tone (in the tradition of Abu- Huraira) but later on, his speech is directed towards individuals. He mentions special names and directs his message to them. In continuation of his speech he says:
'O Fatemah, deliver yourself from the fire of Hell. I cannot do anything for you. I am not the owner of anything before Allah for you. Deliver yourself from the fire. Of course you are related to me and I will observe the ties of Kinship with you. 126
Of course in this address, the Holy Prophet meant to say that he was incapable of making intercession and powerless enough to save anyone from the divine chastisement.
In another tradition which has come down from this companion in the authentic books of the Caliphate school we read as such:
'When this verse [Arabic text] was revealed, the Holy Prophet said: 'O the people of Quraish, redeem yourselves from your Lord. I cannot do anything for you before Allah! O' the sons of Abdul-Muttalib, I am incapable of doing anything for you! 'O Abbass-ibn-Abdul-Muttalib, I am incapable of doing anything for you! 'O Safiyan, the aunt of the Messenger of Allah, I am incapable of doing anything for you! 'O Fatemah, the daughter of Muhammad, you may ask me whatever you wish but I will not be able to do anything for you before Allah. 127
As far as these two traditions are concerned, apart from what we have said in the tradition attributed to Ayesha that in the year of revelation of the verse, Hazrat Fatemah had not yet been born, so that we could say that the Holy Prophet had possibly addressed her, there also exists another matter and it is this that we want to know. Abu-Huraira the initial narrator of the tradition was in the third year of the Holy Prophet's appointment so as to see whether he could narrate such an event? After the victory of 'Khaibar', he travelled to Medina with the group of "Ashasis" and "Dusis" of Yemen.128
Thus, if he narrates anything from time prior to this period he should also mention the names of those from whom he is narrating the same. Consequently, his two traditions like the traditions of Ayesha, involve defect and flaws (discontinuity of chain of narrators)and hence makes their status of creditability shaky.
The third tradition which we shall review is a tradition which Muslim has narrated from Abu Uthman Nahdi. The latter says: 'Qabisah-ibn-Makhareq and Zuhair -ibn-Amro have narrated to me that at the time of revelation of the afore-said verse, the Holy Prophet stood over a heap of stones near a mountain and cried out: 'O the sons of Abd-Munaf! I am a warner to you all. My example to you is like the example of a man who witnessed his foe from a far distance and wished to go much nearer to them so as to bring more news for his people and tribe. However, he feared that he would fail and that his foe would get to his own tribe much sooner than him. Thus he cried out due to fear and warned his near ones and tribe. Like him, I too am sensing danger for you and I warn you of the fire. 129
Abu Uthman narrates this tradition from two persons: (1) Qabisa-ibn-Mukhareq and (2) Zubair-ibn-Amro.
A - It is only in this tradition that the name of Zubair-ibn-Amro has been mentioned and in no other place his name or traces of him can be seen. The researchers in the biographies of companions (of the Holy Prophet) and traditionists say: «The first time when Zubair was recognized in history was in Basra and before that, there was no other trace of him. He had a home in this city which was established in the fourteenth year of Hijra. The only sign through which he could be called the companion (of the Holy Prophet) was this very tradition and basically the men of 'Rijaal' (researchers in the biographies of companions) say: 'Except for this tradition, we do not recognize any other tradition from him.'
Moreover, Bukhari has not brought this tradition in his book since he does not reckon it to be correct. He says: «The reason that this tradition is incorrect and Zubair is not from the companions (of the Holy Prophet) is this that he does not notify that he has heard the tradition from the Holy Prophet.130»
Conslusion: If anyone has recognized Zubair as a companion, he has in fact made use of this tradition and relied on it. Moreover, not only is this tradition a proof of his contact with the Holy Prophet but, as per the inference of the clear-sighted people, this itself is a source of doubt of his contact with the Holy Prophet and it lacks authenticity and credibility.
B - Qabisa-ibn-Mukhareq belonged to the tribe of Bani-Halak. He had not seen the Holy Prophet at the time when the Muslims were in Mecca and it was only after 'Hijrat' (migration) that he, for the first time came before the Holy Prophet along with his tribe (in Medina) and accepted Islam. 131 Thereafter, he returned to his native hometown.132 Therefore, Qabisa too had not been present at the time of revelation of this verse and apparently, had not witnessed the event so that he could narrate it without any channel and chain of transmitters.
Conclusion: We do not possess any reliable piece of information about Zubair's meeting with the Prophet and Qabisa too had no such meeting and acquaintance with the Holy Prophet at the time of revelation of the afore- said verse (in the third year).
This event has also been mentioned in another tradition where A'mash has narrated it from Amro-ibn-Murrat who has narrated from Sa'eed-ibn-Jubair who in turn has narrated from Ibn-Abbass. In this tradition, Ibn-Abbass recites the verse as such:
[Arabic text]
and says: «When this verse was revealed, the Holy Prophet came out and climbed the mountain of 'Safa' and cried out in a warning tone. The people said: 'Who is this man who is crying out in this manner and warning us of some danger?' Some replied: 'He is Muhammad'!» People gathered around him. The Holy Prophet said: 'O Bani so and so, 'O Bani so and so, 'O Bani- Abd Munaf and 'O Bani-Abdul Muttalib! If I inform you that your enemies are hiding behind this mountain and intend to attack you, will you accept my words? They said: We have never heard you utter a lie throughout our lives. The Holy Prophet said:
[Arabic text]
'I warn you (all) of the severe chastisement which lies ahead'.
Abu-Lahab said:
[Arabic text]
'May death befall you; have you gathered us over here (only) for this talk?!
It was in this connection that the verse,
[Arabic text]
was revealed. 133
The first and biggest proof of falsehood of this tradition is the verse [Arabic text] because such a verse cannot be found in the Holy Quran in such a form.
Moreover, this tradition has been narrated from Ibu-Abbass whereas, as per the specification of the researchers (in the biographies of the companions) he was born in 'She'ab', which was exactly three years before 'Hijrat' (migration)134 i.e. seven years after the revelation of the verse. Therefore, the tradition of Ibn-Abbass too lacks consistency in its chain of transmitters.
The traditions which we have examined so far were traditions which have come in 'Sahih' and 'Musnad' of Ahmad. As far as the 'Tafseers' (exegesis) are concerned, the most reliable and extensive of them in the Caliphate school is the 'Tafseer' of Tabari and 'Tafseer-e-Durrul-Manthur' of Suyuti.
The fifth tradition under our investigation is a tradition which Tabari narrates from Abu Musa Ashari who says: «When the verse: [Arabic text] was revealed, the Holy Prophet dipped his hands in his ears and cried out:, 'O Bani Abdul-Muttalib, 'O Sabahah: 'O sons of Abdul-Muttalib, I warn you of danger....»
Suyuti in 'Durrul-Manthir' has narrated this tradition from Ibn-Jurair, Tahari, Tirmidhi and others. 135
However, this tradition too suffers the same fate as the other traditions because the first narrator, Abu Musa came to Medina along with Abu- Huraira in the seventh year after Hijrat.
Secondly, he has narrated the tradition without any medium. As such, his tradition too, is entangled in viable transmission and lacks valency.
6 - In interpretation of this verse, Suyuti has brought another tradition from Anas-ibn-Malik which from the view-point of text is exactly the same as the tradition of Abu-Huraira. However, as far as its chain of transmitters is concerned, this tradition too is creditless because Anas-ibn-Malik was born in Medina and basically did not meet the Holy Prophet before Hijrat (migration) and till then, had not even been to Mecca. Moreover, at the time of the event i.e. in the third year, he was not yet even born; since at the time of the Prophet's migration which occured exactly ten years after the event, he was then ten years old. 136 Thus, Anas was born in Medina in the year of revelation of the verse and was not present in Mecca and even if he was present, he could not be counted amongst the eye-witnesses.
7 - Moreover Suyuti narrates from Burah-ibn-Aazeb a tradition in this regard. Burah-ibn-Aazeb belonged to the tribe of 'Aus' and the clan of Ansar in Medina. In the second year of 'Hijrat' he wanted to participate in the battle of 'Badr' but the Holy Prophet did not allow him since he was only a youngster. This means that he was not even fifteen at that time so as to be mature enough to participate in 'Jihad' (holy war). Thus, at the time of revelation of the verse, he was approximately two years old and was living in Medina and so could not be amongst the direct eye-witnesses and narrators of the event. 137
These three traditions i.e. the traditions of Abu-Huraira, Anas and Burah- ibn-Aazeb are one in wording and all the three of them were not present at the time and place of revelation of the verse. Therefore, this similarity of wording of the tradition can be a document to the official directive of the Ummayid Government in the matter of fabrication of traditions whether the initial narrators have themselves done this in order to obey the command of the Ummayids or whether others have forged the information and presented them in their names.
8 - and 9 - In 'Tafseer-e-Tabari' and 'Tafseer-e-Durrul-Manthir' there exists yet other traditions which are attributed to persons like Muhammad- ibn-Shahab Zuhri and Qatada.138 Just as we have mentioned before, these two gentlemen belonged to the period very much after the Holy Prophet's era and are reckoned to be amongst the group of 'disciples of the companions'. Therfore, we shall no longer linger on their tradition because the absence of the chain of transmitters in them is very clear and obvious.
10 - Other traditions too have been narrated and Suyuti narrates them from the companions of the Holy Prophet such as Zubair. However, his chain of transmitters is inconsistent up to the person of Zubair. In other words Suyuti who was living in the 10th century narrates from Zubair with the medium of one or two persons and it is clear that the gap of nine centuries between Zubair-ibn-Awam and Suyuti cannot be filled by means of one or two persons and this period is stretched out beyond twenty generations.
Thus, these traditions too lack credit and we cannot assess Zubair's remarks in this tradition to be from himself because there exists a strong possibility that he has not narrated this tradition and others have forged it in h is name. Unless and until we do not recognize the continious chain of transmitters back to the first narrator, we cannot attribute the tradition to him. Thus this tradition is far from the reach of examination or analysis and devoid of creditability.