In their efforts to prove their piety to the faithful the leading Deobandi scholars have been particularly fond of quoting alleged dreams. Whilst hadith can be disputed the alleged recipients of these dreams were so pleased with what they saw that they sought it fit to put pen to paper and present these dreams to a wider audience. We would ask our readers to look at two of such dreams and then decide whether this constitutes respect for the dignity of Ahlulbayt (as).
Allamah Ashraf Ali Thanvi claims to have been inspired by the dream we read in a famed Deobandi work namely Al-Ifaazaatul Yaumiyah also known as Malfuzaat Hakim al-Ummat:
“I dreamt that I saw Fatima (ra) taking me to her bosom, thereafter I became good”
Al-Ifaazaatul Yaumiyah, Volume 6 page 37
Thanvi might not have any shame but we would urge Muslims to think about the status of the person being defamed here, this is the daughter of Rasulullah (s), the Leader of the Women of Paradise (this hadith can be found in Sahih al Bukhari (English translation Volume 4 hadith number 819). Sayyida (as) exemplified piety and perfection and Muslims look to her as the perfect role model as a mother and daughter. Yet this third rate Nasibi claims that Sayyida Fatima (as) would embrace him, a non mahram man! May Allah’s curse be upon these people.
Let us now cite a blasphemous incident recorded by a scholar equally loved by Salafies and Deobandies namely Shah Ismaeel Shaheed Dehalwi in his famed work Siraat e Mustaqeem, page 315:
“One of my elders saw in a dream the great saint, Hazrat Ali, and the leader of all women, Hazrat Fatimah (RA). Thus, Hazrat Ali gave a bath to my elder with his own blessed hands and cleansed the body of my elder like a father cleanses the body of his son, and Hazrat Fatimah Zahra dressed him in fine clothes with her blessed hands “.
Siraat e Mustaqeem, page 315
The modern day darling of the Salafi Sect Shaykh Ibrahim al-Jabhan seeks to animadvert the Caliphate of Ali (as) as follows in his work TTabdid Al-Dhalam Wa Tanbih Al-Niyam page 132:
هذا علي رضي الله عنه تولى الخلافة ومكث فيها خمسة أعوام أو تزيد فهل أكل الناس في عهده وشربوا إلا دماء الأبرياء وعرق الضعفاء ودموع الثكالى واليتامى والبؤساء
“This is Ali (ra), he ruled for five years or more and the people during his reign didn’t eat or drink other than the blood of innocent people, the sweat of weak people, and the tears of women, orphans and poor people.”
Salafis are quick to jump down the throats of anyone that seeks to raise questions over the reigns of the first three khalifas, but are happy to view the fourth khalifa (as) as a legitimate target to vent their anger! Just look how he seeks to place blame directly on to Imam Ali (as), accusing him of being responsible for bringing hardships upon his subjects! The same Sect are quick to attack scholars such as Syed Qutb and Syed Maudoodi for criticizing Uthman for the corruption that was prevalent during his reign and have subjected the said authors to vitriolic abuse in their works, yet attacking the reign of Ali (as) by in effect suggesting he had the blood of ‘innocent people’ on his hands shows how low they are prepared to stoop when seeking to attack him. Can we rightly describe those that rebelled against the legitimate head of state, attacked provinces, galvanized a fighting force and entered the battlefield to fight Ali (as) as innocent people? If women were widowed and children orphaned as a consequence of the actions of their men folk why should Imam Ali (as) be demonized for it? Rasulullah (s) certainly did not view those that fought Imam Ali (as) to be innocent, we after all read in Al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah:
عن أحمد بن حفص البغدادي عن سليمان بن يوسف، عن عبيد الله بن موسى، عن فطر، عن حكيم بن جبير، عن إبراهيم، عن علقمة عن علي قال: أمرت بقتال الناكثين والقاسطين والمارقين.
Ali said: ‘I was ordered to fight Nakitheen (oath breakers), Qasateen. (those who refrained from giving bayya to the Imam) and Maraqeen (Khwaarij)’
Salafi hypocrisy does not just end there, since they don’t bat an eyelid over the innocent lives destroyed during the Caliphates of the previous Khalifas, for example what about the loss of slaughter of innocent people that refused to pay Zakat to Abu Bakr such as Malik bin Nuwayra? We never see any Salafi describe such persons as ‘innocent people’ nor do they shed tears for Malik’s bereaved widow, who was ‘married’ to Khalid b. Walid within hours of her husband being visciously slaughtered! And what of poor innocent Hujr bin Adi whose only wrongdoing was his opposition to the cursing of Imam Ali (as) in the mosque of Kufa? He along with his supporters were executed upon the orders of Muawiya, one was actually buried alive, and we are yet to see a Salafi pen attack Muawiya for such a felonious act, on the contrary Ansar.Org have expressed their understanding and support for such a brutal approach! And what of the Caliphate of Yazeed ibn Muawiyah? During his three year reign he slaughtered Imam Hussain (as) and his Shia in Karbala and thereafter pillaged the district of Harra, wherein he set out on a pogrom of the last remnants of the Sahaba and raped their women folk. Can we not deduce that the reign of Yazeed was one that caused to paraphrase al-Jabhan “the blood of innocent people, the sweat of weak people, and the tears of women, orphans and poor people”. Why then is it Salafis remain silent over the reign of Yazeed, and never condemn him for his actions? Rather than do so, they adopting taqiyya by refusing to voice an opinion with more abrasive Salafis openly defending his action and deeming him guaranteed paradise!
Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abdullah ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki (d. 543 H) was one of the famed Sunni scholars. Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records about him in Al-Jame al-Saghir, Volume 1 page 365:
“He wrote a book about Hussain (may Allah be pleased with and disgrace his opponents), he claimed that Yazeed killed him justly by the sword of his grandfather. We seek refuge in the Lord of the forsake”.
`Abd al-Ra`uf Muhammad al-Munawi likewise commented:
“He [Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Abdullah ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki] wrote a book about Husain (may Allah be pleased with and disgrace his opponents), he claimed that Yazid killed him justly by the sword of his grandfather. We seek refuge in the Lord of the forsake”.
Fayd Al Qadeer Volume 5 page 246
Let us quote the actual words of Ibn Arabi:
"Husain failed to take heed of the words of Ibn Abbas who was the greatest scholar of that time, nor did he listen to the teacher of companions Ibn Umar. He wanted to be young when he was in fact old, people were not present around him, he did not have helpers to support his stance, nor did he have people that were willing to sacrifice their lives for him…..
Those who waged war against him did that only because they were doing Taweel (interpretation). Nor did they killed him except they had heard from his grandfather the most merciful of all Prophets, foretold disputes and warned of fitnah and there are many narrations regarding this like Prophet said; "After me there will be many calamities and much evil behavior. Whoever you see splitting away from the Jama'ah or trying to create division among the Ummah of Muhammad (saw), then kill him!", So the people waged war with Husain only because of narrations like these".
Al-'Awasim min al-Qawasim pages numbers 237, 244-245
Imam of Nawasib Ibn Tamiyyah satated in his book Minhaj al-Sunnah, Volume 4 page 316:
“There wasn’t any benefit either for religion or for life in his (Hussain’s) rebellion”.
The Najis Nasibi author goes on to say:
“His (Hussain) rebellion and murder caused a mischief, it would not have happened had he stayed at home, what he (Hussain) sought to achieve of the good and vanish of the evil he couldn’t achieve it, nay the evil became more by his rebellion”.
Salafi Shaykh Ibrahim al-Jabhan attacks the stance of Imam Hussain (as) as follows in Tabdeed al-Dhalam, page 161:
ونحن لو سلمنا بعدم شرعية خلافة من تمت له البيعة من الأمويين والعباسيين تحت ضلال السقوف ، فما الذي يحملنا على التسليم بشرعية محاولة من يريد أن ينتزع هذه الخلافة تحت ضلال السيوف؟
”If we assumed the illegality of the Caliphate of Umayyad and Abbasids dynasties that were achieved under the shade of a ceiling, then why we should believe in the legality of an individual’s effort to end this rule under the shade of swords?”
We read in Muhadrat fi Tarikh al-Umam al-Islamyia, Volumne 2 page 129 by Shaykh Muhammad Khudri Beik (d. 1377 H):
“Hussain made a big mistake by his rebellion”.
We read in Syar alam al-Nubala by Dahabi, Volume 3 page 253:
“He (Hassan) was exaggerator in marriage and divorce, he got married to seventy women.”
Ibrahim Al-Sulayman Al-Jab'han attacks the Ahl'ul bayt Imams as follows:
And I have not revealed a secret if I say that Ja'far ibn Muhammad was the brightest star chosen by the Masonry groups. It is indeed proven that he was one of those blinds that the Masonry Devils counted upon and pushed him to achieve the Caliphate. And the fact that Shia books are in consensus and the History sources points very clearly to this fact, that the mentioned person (i.e. Imam Al-Sadiq) was the second founder of the Shiite creed after the enemy of Allah Ibn Saba Al-Yahudi. And that he was the one who turned Tashayyu' from a political movement to a religious creed. And he, with the help of these devils and their support, implanted the roots of this heinous crime, and he left for his followers a spring that its soaking poisons does not dry out, and also through the strict secrecy that he obliged his supporters, agents and bearers of his doctrines to keep, and also through his drastic orders to keep Taqiyyah, and to put on every color, which does not leave any place of doubt that between Tashayyu' and Masonry there is a strange alignment.
Tabdid Al-Dhalam Wa Tanbih Al-Niyam published in 1979 page161
“And I have not revealed a secret if I say that some of the Shia Imams were of the brightest stars chosen by the Masonry groups', because the Masonry Devils counted upon and pushed them to achieve the Caliphate. And the fact that they were the ones who turned Tashayyu' from a political movement to a religious creed. And they, with the help of these devils and their support, implanted the roots of this heinous crime, and they left for their followers a spring that its soaking poisons does not dry out, and also through the strict secrecy that they obliged their supporters, agents and bearers of their doctrines to keep, and also through their drastic orders to keep Taqiyyah, and to put on every color, which does not leave any place of doubt that between Tashayyu' and Masonry there is a strange alignment”
Tabdid Al-Dhalam Wa Tanbih Al-Niyam Published in 1981 page161
