Then an attack on the house was launched.

Then an attack on the house was launched. At this stage they had to face Zahra’s defense. She took the lead to save Wilayat and Imamate of Ali. By all their brazen-facedness they pushed her aside. Then they took hold of Ali and dragged him to the Mosque. All the while a naked sword was drawn over his head – a constant threat accompanied him which could come true any moment. They tried to draw from him what was their desire (allegiance to Abu Bakr).

Their design did not succeed because of presence of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter. If the Imam had least desire to pay allegiance to Abu Bakr or had he a least agreement with that group or for sake of any other reason had he any interest to benefit of the Ummah or Islam there was no sense in obstinacy he showed. The force and tyranny applied to him is enough to prove his unwillingness to accept Abu Bakr’s Caliphate. How could he agree for his right to be usurped and give acceptance to this?

All this goes to prove that: Rulership is a right bestowed by God. As a result, it cannot be exchanged or given to others. It is irrevocable. Such a thing would be to ignore divine decree and commit terrific atrocities; and yet they say: “For the sake of interests of Muslims he transferred the right of leadership to others.”!

[1] Second Wrong Result After Muhammad Salih Haeri Mazandarani**[2]** for the first time dwelled on such a [1] Abdul Kareem Bi-Aazaar Shirazi: Paara-e-Payambar (Portion of the Prophet), Vol. 6, Pg. 15 [2] It is interesting that in the explanation of his outlook it is said: “He claims that there are religious proofs to support this separation!” (Muhammad Waizzaada Khorasani: Nida-e-Wahdat , Pg.

216.type of thought in his article in a magazine of Egypt, Message of Islam, published by Darul Taqreeb**[1]** Muhammad Madani, principal of Islamic law college of Azhar and director of the said magazine, depending on contents of the article wrote an essay titled: ‘A great change in Al-Azhar University.’ He writes: “This discourse clearly conveys that accusation of usurpation of Caliphate and that those who took the reins of power were usurpers, is baseless.

It is far from Shia principles of faith. They too, like all Muslims, consider the basis rests at the satisfaction of masses.”! [2] The wrong result is not drawn directly from conjecture of separation between Imamate and rulership. But it is drawn on the basis of first result of this category of conjectures.

✦ ✦ ✦