In this chapter, the respected author has introduced briefly several topics. We shall discuss those subjects and provide some explanations for our readers.

The Children Of Ali Are The Children Of The Prophet

It was an established point of view of Shi’a faith that the children of Ali (‘a) were the children of the Prophet. Many Sunni scholars shared this view with us. There were several Qur’anic Verses and other narrations to strengthen this vision.

Once Abbasid Caliph Mamoon asked Imam Ar-Ridha (‘a) to provide evidence from Qur’an to support their claim that they were the progeny of the Prophet, even though they were only the offsprings of his daughter. He replied that the following Verse of Surah Al-Anaam was a

the proof of his query:

وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِهِ دَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُوسُفَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَهَارُونَ وَكَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِينَ

“And in his progeny were David, Solomon, Job, Joseph, Aaron, and Moses. Thus We do reward those who do well? And Zakariyya, John, Jesus and Ilyas all were in the ranks of righteous” (6:84).

In this Verse God had included Jesus (‘a) in the progeny of Abraham via his mother Mary (‘a). That was such a strong argument that a linguist like Mamoon could not say anything but praise for the Imam.

It was mentioned in both Shi’a and Sunni books that the Prophet of God had said: “God has sanctioned the offspring of every Prophet from his sperms, but my progeny was endorsed through the seeds of Ali Ibn Abi Talib.”

A similar statement is recorded in Al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah: “The children of a woman are related to their father’s lineage, except in the case of the children of Fatimah (‘a), whose guardianship and lineage are endorsed through me.”

The Prophet (S) addressed Imam Al-Hasan (‘a) and Imam Al-Husayn (‘a) as his sons on several occasions through statements such as, “My son Hasan (‘a) is a leader”, or, when he referred to both Imams (‘a) saying, “O God, I deeply love these two sons of mine who are born to Fatimah (‘a) You too my Lord, show Thy love for them.”

It was also reported that Angels were instructed by God to address Imam Al-Husayn (‘a) as Ibn Rasul or son of the Prophet. The Prophet of God once said “An angel, which had not visited me before came to me today. He told me that my son Husayn (‘a) will be martyred, naturally, until a metaphor had its basis, words remain confined to their original meanings.”

Love Of Aali Ar-Rasul Is Mandatory

The Qur’anic Verse, which the respected author produced above from Surah Al-Shura, was a definite proof of this claim. Although, it was apparently revealed in the support of Infallible Imams, yet the companions asked the Prophet (S) to tell them the identity of his nearest relations whose love was made compulsory for them. The Prophet replied - Ali (‘a), Fatimah (‘a), Hasan (‘a) and Husayn (‘a). However, as a corollary it also envisaged all Sayyids.

There were several Prophetic narrations, which suggested that the love of Aali ar-Rasul was compulsory. We have quote some of those traditions below, to complete this subject.

1. “The one who dies in the love of Aali Muhammad has died the death of a martyr.”

2. “The one who dies in the love of Aali Muhammad, his sins are pardoned.”

3. “The one, who dies with the love of Aali Muhammad, is a person of perfect faith.”

4. The one who dies with the love of Aali Muhammad, initially he is given the good tidings of Paradise by the angel of death and then by the Angels accounting for deeds (Nakirain)”.

   There are other Ahadith, as below, that tackle the same goal from an opposite perspective.

5. “Anyone who holds animosity against my Ahl al-Bayt will be deprived of my intercession”.

6. “Anyone who holds grudge against my family will find his forehead marked on the Day of Resurrection that he is deprived of God’s grace.”

7. “Anyone who dies with the animosity of my family (Aali Muhammad) dies a death of an infidel.”

8. “The one, who dies with the animosity of Aali Muhammad, will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.”

9. The Prophet of God had said, “There are four categories of people such that if they come to me with sins equivalent to the entire humanity, even then I shall intercede on their behalf. They are – those who help my progeny, or those help them in their need, those who love them with words and actions, and those who practically defend them against an aggressor.”

It is reported from Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) that on the day of resurrection, the Prophet (S) would call out, “If anyone holds an obligation against me, he should come forward and take a reward for that claim.

People would reply - may our parents be ransom to you, how could we hold a claim against you, while you hold entitlements against us. The Prophet would say that from the word ‘claim’, he meant that if someone had provided shelter to any member of Ahl al-Bayt, or performed an act of kindness to anyone of them, or clad a frayed member of my family or fed one of them while he was hungry. He would ask that person to stand up and ask for return of that favour.

At that instant, some people would stand and speak for their services for the family of the Prophet (S). At this juncture, a voice will come from God - O My dearly loved, place them in the Paradise where ever you wish.

The Prophet (S) would place them in a district of paradise, called Wasila, where they would not find any partition between the faithful and the Prophets.”

Clarification Of A Doubt

Some Ahadith that we have mentioned above, were specifically related to the Imams, but there were several other authentic traditions about all kinds of Sayyids, including virtuous and reprobates. Some individuals of the Ummah suggested that the Shariah did not recommend extending regards to those Sayyids who were sinners. Some objectors go on to state to the extent that they were in doubt about such sinners being Sadat (members of the Prophets family). They quoted the Qur’anic Verses related to Prophet Noah and his son.

To counter this argument, we could say that lacking personal integrity did not qualify one to be ex-communicated from their family lineage. The Qur’an bore witness that when Abraham (‘a) requested God to continue the office of Imamate permanently within his family, he was answered:

لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ

“But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers” (2:124).

This Verse suggested that while unfair members of the family would continue to be the part of the Abraham’s lineage, they would not receive the status of Imamate.

Similarly, in the Qur’an God said:

وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي ذُرِّيَّتِهِمَا النُّبُوَّةَ وَالْكِتَابَ فَمِنْهُم مُّهْتَدٍ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ

“And certainly, We sent Nuh and Ibrahim and We gave to their offspring the (gift of) prophethood and the Book; so, there are among them those who go aright, and most of them are transgressors” (57:26).

This Verse clearly suggested that misbehaving children do remain within the family lineage. In another Qur’anic Verse:

فَمِنْهُمْ ظَالِمٌ لِّنَفْسِهِ وَمِنْهُم مُّقْتَصِدٌ وَمِنْهُمْ سَابِقٌ بِالْخَيْرَاتِ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ

“… But of them are some who wrong themselves and of them are some who are lukewarm, and of them are some who outstrip (others) through good deeds, by Allah's leave” (35:32).

It was mentioned in the elucidation of this Verse that the first kind of Sadaat classed, as Dhalim were the sinners and reprobate. A Hadith of the holy Prophet that qualified the respect for his family members states, “Respect my family members for the sake of God if they are virtuous, and for me if they are dissolute.”

Reprobation Cannot Dissolve Family Title

To argue on the grounds of the episode of Noah’s Son that sinning might excommunicate you from the family tree is not correct. However, it is correct to infer that this honour would be withdrawn from those who distort their faith and relinquish the honourable family traditions of their guided ancestors.

This is so because Noah’s son was not only accused of renouncing the need for prayers, fasting and other aspects of the religion, but he was also charged for completely denying the heavenly laws. Noah’s own statement:

يَا بُنَيَّ ارْكَب مَّعَنَا وَلَا تَكُن مَّعَ الْكَافِرِينَ

“O, Son come aboard with us and don’t be among the infidels” (11:42).

The Qur’an said:

إِنَّهُ عَمَلٌ غَيْرُ صَالِحٍ

“He is not of thy family: For his conduct is unrighteous” (11:46).

This meant that his basic concept of the faith was wrong. Consequently, such types of Sayyids, who were not in accord with the religion and faith of Ahl al-Bayt and associated themselves with their enemies and yet, qualified for any respect, were not found.

Many traditions were mentioned about such people in the text of this booklet (Risalah). The statement of Imam Ar-Ridha (‘a) supplements these. He said: “To cast an eye of adoration on our progeny is an act of faith”.

The narrator asked Imam Ar-Ridha (‘a) whether that privilege was only reserved for the faces of the Imams (‘a)? The Imam replied that it applied to the rest of the progeny as well, as long as they did not excommunicate themselves from the religion of Prophet Muhammad (S), and did not become the followers of falsehood and the condemned religions”.

Summarily, those Sayyids, who firmly believe in the religion of Islam but due to human weakness commit some mistakes, their respect is to be definitely observed.

A Question And Its Answer

Are those Sayyids like Zaid and his sons Yahya and Ja’far worth respecting, when they proclaimed their own Imamate in opposition to the guided Imams?

There were several narrations from the Imams condemning such behaviour. They had commanded their followers to discard such claimants. However, as a precaution, one should remain silent since it was an internal family affair. The Imams might have forgiven their acts. There were several reports, which suggested that such a situation might have prevailed in the family of Imams.

It was mentioned in Ihtijaj al-Tabrasi that some problems were discussed with the twelfth Imam including the episode of Zaid and his sons. Imam replied,

“My uncle’s state of affairs was very similar to the experience of Joseph and his brothers.”

Researchers and Scholars have concluded from this reply that Ja’far had faltered in a manner similar to the brothers of Joseph, but later on with the help of God he repented and his apology was accepted, just as Joseph had said to his brothers on that occasion:

قَالَ لَا تَثْرِيبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْيَوْمَ يَغْفِرُ اللَّهُ لَكُم

“There is no blame on you today; God will forgive you (for the mistakes you have committed)” (12:92).

This showed that the finale of these Sayyids might have happened along the same note of repentance and forgiveness. There were various narrations in praise of Ja’far, which suggest that he never claimed Imamate for himself that is why, he is called Ja’far al-Tawwab. It is recommended that non-Sayyids must show their respect for Ja’far. This is so because according to Abi Saeed Makarmi, it is said that once he was sitting with Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) and some people among the gathering used foul language for Ja’far al-Tawwab. Then the Imam rebuked them by saying,

“Beware, of interfering in our family matters, other than with words of respect.”

True Sayyids Must Repent Before Their Death

There were several authentic narrations, which suggested that when Sayyids linked truly in lineage to the Prophet, when involved with iniquities, were provided with a chance by the grace of God to repent and die as a true Muslim. It was reported from Imam Ja’far As-Sadiq (‘a) that God provided a chance to all the members of Prophet’s family to correct themself before death, and that period may be as short as two consecutive milking phases of a camel.

In Tarikh al-Qum an episode of Ahmed Ibn Ishaaq was quoted, which supplemented this view. It is said that Ahmed used to admire and revere the Sayyids. Among them was one Sayyid Husayn Al-Qummi. Once Ahmed came to know that he was an alcoholic. Therefore, Ahmed stopped his social security and refused to pay the prescribed funds. At this point, Sayyid tried to meet Ahmed, who snubbed him by refusing to meet him. Husayn Al-Qummi returned home totally dejected and disappointed.

After sometime, Ahmed went to Makkah for the Hajj and after completing the pilgrimage went to visit Imam Hasan Al-’Askari (‘a) in Medina. Imam declined his request saying that if he had no time to meet ‘our progeny’, then we too have no time for him. After some efforts Ahmed made his way to Imam and told him that his behaviour was in response to Husayn’s indulgence in drinking. Imam replied that no matter what the physical state of his descendent was, his respect for him was mandatory. Imam advised him not to underestimate his progeny, for his attitude towards them was a reflection of the love and care held by the followers for their Imams. If they are laid back over this issue, then they might be among the losers.

After this meeting, Ahmed went back to Qum. People as usual came to greet him and Husayn was also among the crowd. Ahmed received Husayn Al-Qummi with love and respect, and when rest of the crowd dispersed Husayn enquired about the reason behind his change in behaviour. Ahmed then narrated the entire incident that took place in Medina. Husayn thus realised his mistake and cried to seek repentance for his sins from Allah. He became an exemplary Muslim. This incident reflected that a true Sayyid must one day return to the folds of faith. On the other hand, if a person claims to be a Sadat and yet dies as a fornicator then he is certainly not a Sayyid.

Sadaqa Is Prohibited For Sayyids

All Muslims agree that Sadaqa was forbidden for the Sayyids, and its reason was the same that was quoted by the author in the text of this Risalah. Allegorically speaking Sadaqa was the leftover muck and grime of human needs. So, God had protected the Sayyids from consuming this, given their value in His eyes. This was an instruction for those who considered non-Sayyids to be at par with the Sayyids.

Also, just as a state purse was reserved only for the Royals and Lords, God had allocated Khums for Sayyids, which was half of the 20% levy charged on all savings in a year from every working male and female. It therefore, was regrettable then that a majority of Muslims had debarred Sayyids from this allowance. And some of those who accepted this charge, did not pay it as due regularly. Or, if they did, they did not use it for the right causes.

Blessings And Punishments Are Doubled Up For The Sayyids

There were so many narrations, besides what has been quoted above to highlight the status of the Sayyids. Yet, it did not mean that all the privileges were free for them. They could not do whatever they wished to, in order to disfigure the codes of Islamic law, and yet be licensed to enter the Paradise without being probed. If it was so, then it would tantamount to the charging our Prophet (S) with partiality towards his family. This would mean that the person of the Prophet (S) could be blamed for execution of some cardinal sins, which God-forbidding was beyond his status.

The fact was that the final reward depended upon the true faith and exemplary deeds of a person. However, this was also the accepted view of all Muslims that Sayyids were preferred one up over the rest of the Ummah. For each act of decency and immorality their reward or punishment would also be doubled respectively. This was not at all strange, because God said about the wives of the Prophet:

يَا نِسَاءَ النَّبِيِّ مَن يَأْتِ مِنكُنَّ بِفَاحِشَةٍ مُّبَيِّنَةٍ يُضَاعَفْ لَهَا الْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ

“O, wives of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, you will receive double the punishment” (33:30).

وَمَن يَقْنُتْ مِنكُنَّ لِلَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتَعْمَلْ صَالِحًا نُّؤْتِهَا أَجْرَهَا مَرَّتَيْنِ

“And whosoever of you is submissive unto Allah and His messenger and doeth right, We shall give double the reward” (33:31).

If this logic was true for wives of the Prophet; it would also be true for his other relatives.