The witness of the lady of Islam (p.

The witness of the lady of Islam (p.b.u.h.) was in this instance enough in itself This being because as the honoured verse states, she was: ** (Koran; Chapter 33, verse 33; M. H. Shakir - translation )** “Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanliness from you, O people of the house! And to purify you a (thorough) purifying. And the well-known tradition “Kasa”, which is reported in many of the creditable books of the sunni, and their books of integrity, speaks of the innocent ones.

God kept all forms of uncleanliness and undesirable acts away from the Prophet (p.b.u.h.), Ali (p.b.u.h.), Fatimah (p.b.u.h.), Hassan and Hossein (p.b.u.h.) and made them free of sin. How could it be possible for the testimony or claim of such a person to be put to doubt and questioned?! The witness given by Ali (p.b.u.h.) was also by itself enough, because he was also possessed of the degree of purity.

In addition to the purification verse and other verses and narrations attesting to this fact, there is this famous tradition: ( Ibn Abi al-hadid, volume 16, page 219) “Ali is just, and justice is with Ali, and wherever he is, justice is with him” (English interpretation from the Persian, by the translator) Which is itself enough; how is it that justice revolves around the axis of Ali’s being but his testimony is not accepted?!

Who has the nerve to refute his witness in the face of this saying of the Prophet (p.b.u.h.), which has been reported by both shia and sunni?

The testimony of Umm Emen was also enough in itself, just as ibn Abi al-hadid reported: Umm Emen said to them, don’t you swear to the fact that the prophet said: “I am of the dwellers of Heaven”, (If you accept this then how can you refute my testimony?) ( Ibn Abi al-hadid translation by translator) Even not to mention the previous; the ruling knowledge, when obtained from different proofs (sense -, or similar to sense, proofs), is sufficient for judgment.

The possession and “in hand”, on the one side, the testimony of these witnesses, each of whose testimonies should be enough proof, on the other side, don’t they form knowledge and certainty? The tradition about the lack of inheritance being left by Prophets is actually in another form and having a different meaning, not the way that the usurpers of Fadak reported or interpreted.