[1] Another point is: If Amirul Momineen Ali (a.

[1] Another point is: If Amirul Momineen Ali (a.s.) after these oppressions, tyrannies and usurpation of Caliphate from the aspect of protecting Islam and responsibilities the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.s.) had given him from Allah, does this reflect that Ali was happy or indifferent in his heart about tyrannies and atrocities done to him and his wife, Zahra? Does this mean that Ali treated the tyrannies committed to him as brotherly and friendly?

Ali was under a mandate from the Prophet to tolerate tyranny for the sake of preserving Islam**[2]** although his Caliphate was taken away from him. He refrained from taking back his right by an armed uprising because his motive and aim was greater and nobler. He had to remain honest to Prophet’s recommendations to him. Can Ali be sympathetic and have normal behavior and ordinary conduct against a tyrant, usurper and murderer? He himself has referred to this.

[3] If he remained silent to avoid war and bloodshed to protect Quran from being destroyed totally and likewise the family of the Prophet; does this mean that it was a brotherly difference? On many occasions Ali interfered in the dealings of Caliphs. This shows his sympathy towards Islamic Ummah and its interests. It was his intention to protect religion from being destroyed. Such is the conduct of men of God against biggest enemies of faith, or God or themselves.

Men of God have always behaved as such. They show endurance and tolerance in most pressing conditions. They have always invited to good and a straight way. However this cannot mean that they were looking eye to eye with the tyrants. It does not reflect that they did not have differences or that they were friendly with them. [1] Refer: Muhammad Jawad Hujjati Kermani: Jam-e-Jam Daily, Issue No.

12, Bahman 1379 [2] That is protection of Quran and Ahle Bayt (a.s.) and absence of apostasy and return of the Ummah to the conditions of idol-worship and ignorance. [3] “Be enemy to a tyrant and helper to a victim” Ali’s will to his sons, Hasan and Husain, Nahjul Balagha, Muhammad Abduh, Letter No. 47. This particularity also displays their (the enemies’) conduct towards the Imam.

It has been said: “Our elders and leaders, Ali, Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were not enemies with each other though they had differences with each other – very serious differences. But they were not one another’s enemy.”! [1] The calamity that happened after Saqifah; what was it, if not sign of enmity?