ভূমিকা

Shiavault - a Vault of Shia Islamic Books A Victim Lost in Saqifah 1-4 Deviated Repercussions of This Conjecture First Wrong Result According to this outlook, we cannot find any other justification for avoidance and unwillingness of Imam Ali (a.s.) to give allegiance to Abu Bakr. [1] There are actions of oppression and tyranny. House of only daughter of Prophet, Fatima was attacked and set afire and the flames consumed the door. All this was done directly by Caliphs themselves.

The only conclusion that can be drawn is this: The base is wrong. In such circumstances, acknowledgment of Ali to Abu Bakr’s authority is a thing caused by conditions prevalent at that time. Therefore it is a natural outcome. Hence it is written as follows: “Imam Ali (a.s.) refused to give allegiance for a short period. But his high conduct and demeanor and forgiving nature made him pay allegiance.”! [2] “Imam Ali’s (a.s.) only aim was to safeguard Islam, protect its entity and preserving unity.

[3] Therefore he paid allegiance to Caliphs.”! [4] Or they write: “The conduct and behavior of Ali and his sons with Caliphs was such that it took to itself to reflect as if acknowledgement and acceptance is mingled, mixed, molded.”! [5] “Ali for the sake of interests accepted rulership of two Caliphs.”! [6] [1] [The correct Bayyat is one that is given with willingness and desire of the person. Else, it is only a handshake. Or it can be named as an outer show.

The acknowledgement of Ali took six months to take place. And it took place under hatred and application of force. It was actually a handshake. (Allamah Askari: Saqifah Pg. 116) For better and wider comprehension of Bayyat and conditions that surrounded it, refer to Chap. 1 of Vol. 4 of this book. [2] Abdul Kareem Bi-Aazaar Shirazi: Mashal-e-Ittehaad (Torch of Unity), Pg. 20 [3] [On the basis of Shia Belief the foundation of Islam is Imamate and Wilayat] [4] Ibid.

Hambastigi-e-Mazaahib-e-Islami (Unity of Islamic Sects), Preface to the 3 rd Edition, Pg. 11 [5] Mustafa Husaini Tabatabai: Raahi Bi Soo-e-Wahdat-e-Islami (Way to Islamic Unity), Pg. 163 [6] Ibid. 5 Raahi Bi Soo-e-Wahdat-e-Islami (Way to Islamic Unity), Pg. 167 “Ali refrained for a period after passing away of Prophet, afterwards he did Bay’at to Abu Bakr.”! [1] How can it be accepted at all that Ali should accept and acknowledge Abu Bakr’s Caliphate?

A Caliphate that was framed against divine consent? A Caliphate that was usurped and taken by force, trick and tyranny?