Baraa’at or Tabarraa is derived from the root “ba–
ra–aa’”. Litterateurs define it as “a person dissociating
himself from what he dislikes”.1 Excellent examples of
this are in Surah Taubah (9): Verses 1-3 about
dissociating from the polytheists and Surah Yunus (10):
Verse 41 which is about keeping away from certain evil
Some interpreters are of the view that dissociating
from polytheists means refraining from all kinds of
relationship building and expression of love for them.
(Atyab al-Bayaan by Abdul Husain Tayyab, vol. 6, p. 172; Tafseer al-Quran al-Azeem by Ismail Ibn Katheer, vol. 4, p. 90)
The belief in monotheism demands keeping aloof from beliefs which are against it, belief in finality of Prophethood demands distancing from those who falsely claim that position and the belief in Imamat and Wilayat is to dissociate from those who have not been appointed for this great position. Since Shias believe in Ameerul Momineen Ali Ibn Abi Talib (a.s.) to be the direct successor of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) based on rational arguments, the natural pre-requisite of this belief is that they express their dissociation from those who did not allow this divine caliphate to materialise. This difference is a natural and religious one because it pertains directly to the belief in Imamate which was a controversial issue among the Muslims after the
demise of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).
(Maqaalaat al-Islamiyyeen by Abul Hasan Ali Ibn Ismail Ashari, p. 21;
1 Al-Mufradaat by Raaghib al-Isfahaani, p. 121; Al-Ain by Khaleel Ibn Ahmad Faraahidi, vol. 8, p. 289; Al-Sihaah fi al-Lughat by Ismail Ibn Hammaad Jauhari, vol. 1, p. 36; Lisaan al-Arab by Muhammad Ibn Mukarram Ibn Manzoor, vol. 1, p. 32
Al-Melal wa al-Nehal by Muhammad Ibn Abdul Kareem Shahristaani, vol. 1, p. 24)
Numerous such incidents are available in books of history when Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) by complaining about his usurped right, and to Allah as well, has narrated the oppression of Quraysh. Such incidents can be easily found in traditions and historical sources even before the tragedy of Aashuraa.2 In these books, the aforementioned differences and animosity of the opponents are mentioned therein. Our aim is just to drive the attention of truth seekers in this direction. After the tragedy of Aashuraa and the beginning of the reign of Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.), a series of dissociations continued through the noble character of Imam (a.s.) and his companions. But a major difference between then and the previous era (before Aashuraa) is that Baraa’at and ideological warfare were found in the society but at an individual level and not on a large scale. This practice was not completely common among Muslims in general or even within the common Shias. Despite all the efforts by Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and Janabe Zahra (s.a.) people abandoned Ahle Bait (a.s.). As a result, the paucity of
2 One can refer to Nahj al-Balaagha, sermon 3 (Khutba Shiqshiyyah); Elal al-Sharaae’ by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn Husain Saduq (a.r.), vol. 1, p. 148; Sermon of Janabe Zahra (s.a.) in Balaagha al-Nisa, Al-Ehtejaaj by Ahmad Ibn Ali al-Tabresi, vol. 2 ,p. 287; Sharh Nahj al- Balaagha by Ibn Abil Hadeed Mo’tazeli, vol. 3, p. 115; Tareekh al-Umam wa al-Mulook famous as Tareekh al- Tabari by Muhammad Ibn Jurair al-Tabari, vol. 2, p. 443; Qurb al-Asnaad by Abdullah Ibn Ja’far al-Himyari, p. 60; Hidaayat al-Kubra by Husain Ibn Hamadaan Khaseebi, p. 45 supporters and the will of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) made Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) give preference to patience and silence over everything else. (Nahj al-Balaagha, sermons 13 & 217 and there are many more references on this subject. For details, one can refer to Paimaan wa Paayedaari by Dr. Abdul Ali Muwahhedi) After the first two caliphates, the focus of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and both his sons was to prevent the society from the increasing ideological evils and stop the Bani Ummayyah, who were then in power and their animosity towards Islam especially that of Abu Sufyan and his progeny is evident for every intelligent and wise person, from achieving their motive.
(Hayaat Fikri aur Siyaasi Imamaan Shia by Rasool Ja’fariyan, pp. 62-66 and 92)
After the incident of Aashuraa and at other times, some events occurred which were unimaginable previously. As a result, Baraa’at against the usurpers of the right of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) which was all this while being practiced behind closed doors came out in the open. After Aashuraa, these incidents had a grave impact on the Muslim society at large and specifically on the Shia community (more specifically, in areas such as Kufa). Explicit cursing had now begun in Shia gatherings. Before continuing, it is important to state that this topic is extremely vast and extensive which requires a voluminous book. Keeping in mind the limitations of this article, we will only suffice with indications. Those who wish to research extensively can refer to the books and references. We shall divide this topic into 4 parts:
- Contribution of the event of Aashuraa in dissemination of Baraa’at
- Kufa and the ideology of Baraa’at post-Aashuraa
- Usurping the right of Ahle Bait (a.s.), the most important factor for Baraa’at
- Imam Sajjad (a.s.) and the ideology of Baraa’at Contribution of the event of Aashuraa in dissemination of Baraa’atThe event of Karbala has been the most sensitive and critical criterion in Islamic history in comparing Ahle Bait (a.s.) and their Shias with their opponents. The approach of Ahle Bait (a.s.) and their Shias has been completely different and contradictory to that of their opponents and the rulers. Rather some senior historians opine that this approach was adopted by Shias only after the martyrdom of Imam Husain (a.s.).
(Al-Silah bayn al-Tasawwuf wa al-Tashayyo’ by Kaamil Mustafa Shaybi, vol. 1, p. 27; Tashayyo’ Dar Maseer Tareekh by Syed Husain Muhammad Jafari, p. 250)
During that time, it was the basic belief of Shias that no one had the right of caliphate except Ahle Bait (a.s.). It was evident for Ahle Bait (a.s.) and their followers that establishment of the Bani Umayyah rule began during the first caliphate itself.1 The second caliph had labelled Muawiyah Ibn Abu Sufyan as the Caesar of Arab.2 He had given him complete authority over Syria3 and never objected over his work.4 Muawiyah himself confessed this: “By Allah! Whatever authority and power I was granted, it was only due to my proximity with Umar.”
(Mukhtasar Tareekh Damishq by Muhammad Ibn Mukarram Ibn Manzoor, vol. 9, p. 161)
After Muawiyah, caliphate within the Muslim world turned feudal and Bani Umayyah became a dynasty. Despite clear dissent from the people, Muawiyah imposed his son Yazeed as a caliph.
(Al-Imaamah wa al-Siyaasah by Ibn Qutaybah Dainawari, vol. 1, pp. 182 & 192)
The Bani Umayyah were humiliated due to the tragedy of Aashuraa and hence, tried to defend themselves against this inexplicable incident in order to strengthen their already weakening rule. It was for this reason Yazeed, the accursed, addressed Imam Sajjad (a.s.) in his court thus, “Praise be to Allah who killed you.”5 In other words, he tried to ascribe his filthy deeds to Allah which is nothing but a belief in
1 Tareekh al-Khulafa by Rasool Ja’fariyan, p. 81
2 Al-Iqd al-Fareed by Ibn Abd Rabbehi, vol. 3, p. 365
3 Tareekh al-Khulafa by Ibn Khayyaat, vol. 1, p. 157
4 Tareekh al-Umam wa al-Mulook by Muhammad Ibn
Jurair al-Tabari, vol. 6. P. 184
5 Kitaab al-Ehtejaaj by Ahmad Ibn Ali al-Tabresi, vol. 2, p. 310
compulsion. Such attribution was also done by Muawiyah and the second caliph.1 The second caliph had stated that “It was the desire of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) but Allah did not want Ali (a.s.) to be the caliph.”2 Imam Husain’s (a.s.) refusal to pay allegiance resulted into Shias explicitly declaring that caliphate solely belongs to Ahle Bait (a.s.). Companions of Imam Husain (a.s.) clearly called out in Karbala while introducing themselves that they were on the religion of Ali (a.s.). For instance, when Hajjaaj Ibn Masrooq came out to fight, he was saying, I present to you Husain (a.s.), who is a guide and the guided one
Today you will meet your grandfather, the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) Then your father Ali (a.s.), the possessor of virtue
And we consider only this Ali (a.s.) as the successor (of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.))3 Hilaal Ibn Naafe’ announced,
I am a Yemeni and Bajali slave
My religion is that of Husain (a.s.) and Ali (a.s.)4
The fight between the brave hearts of Imam Husain (a.s.) with the army of Yazeed was actually a combat between two groups viz. one which believed in Caliphate and Imamate of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) to be lawful and right and the other group who were enemies of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) or those who perceived that anyone who occupies the seat of caliphate is right. The slogan of companions of Imam Husain (a.s.) was “I am the one who fought in Jamal, I am upon the religion of Ali (a.s.).” As opposed to this the slogan of
- 1 Tareekh al-Khulafa by Rasool Ja’fariyan, p. 413
- 2 Sharh Nahj al-Balaagha by Ibn Abil Hadeed Mo’tazeli, vol. 12, p. 78
- 3 Al-Futooh by Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn A’tham, vol. 5, p. 199
- 4 Al-Futooh by Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn A’tham, vol. 5, p. 201
Yazeed’s forces was, “I am upon the religion of Usmaan.”
(Tareekh al-Umam wa al-Mulook by Muhammad Ibn Jurair al-Tabari,
vol. 4, pp. 331 & 336) Khaarazmi, a renowned Ahle Tasannun scholar, narrates a tradition in his book that when the beard of Imam Husain (a.s.) was drenched in blood, he (a.s.)
“This is the state in which I shall meet my grandfather, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) while I have dyed my beard in my blood and I shall call out, ‘O Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.)! A and B have killed me!”
(Maqtal al-Husain (a.s.) by Muwaffaq Ibn Ahmad Khwarazmi, vol. 2, p. 34)
Certainly, there is not an iota of doubt that these words of Imam Husain (a.s.) indicate that the foundation of Karbala was laid in Saqifah. It was due to Saqifah that the Muslim nation was deprived of the real divine path i.e. the path of true caliphate and Imamate or the religion of Ahle Bait (a.s.). Traditions on this topic are found excessively in the Imamiyyah sect. For details, one can refer to Al-Ehtejaaj by Ahmad Ibn Ali al-Tabrisi, vol. 2, p. 285. It can also be stated that Aashuraa presents an important aspect of Baraa’at from the people of Saqifah and prepared the ground for future Islamic society to stand up against the deviated ones especially the usurpers of the right of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.). Baraa’at became explicit in some places such as Kufa. For instance, when Mukhtar Saqafi was governing Kufa, Shias and supporters of Mukhtar openly cursed the usurpers of Ali’s (a.s.) rights to the extent that sons of Zubair and Bani Umayyah complained to Mukhtar as to why were Shias cursing their forefathers.
(Tareekh al-Umam wa al-Mulook by Muhammad Ibn Jurair al-Tabari, vol. 4, p. 518)
Gradually, Shias and Alawiites distanced themselves from others and joined Mukhtar. That group organised itself to face the sons of Zubair and Bani Umayyah. Hence, during the time of Mukhtar Saqafi’s governorship, Baraa’at gained impetus along with the Imamate of Ahle Bait (a.s.).
(Tareekh al-Khulafa by Rasool Ja’fariyan, 597)
Kufa and the ideology of Baraa’at post Aashuraa After the tragedy of Aashuraa, Kufa was the Shiite capital. Shias of Kufa were labelled as ‘Raafizi’ because they rejected the caliphate of others. ‘Ra-fa-za’ means to reject. Faan S. Joseph writes that Kufa laid the foundation of ‘Raafiziism’. (Kalaam wa Jaame’, p. 309) Kufa emerged as a centre of Raafiziism. During the reign of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) and post that, many famous personalities lived there and despite the presence of enemies and opponents, this movement gained strength by the day and Kufa became the heart of Shiaiism.
(Al-Ghaaraat by Ibrahim Ibn Muhammad Saqafi, vol. 2, p. 558; Tareekh Tashayyo’ dar Iran, p. 106)
For instance, it is mentioned about Jabir Ibn Yazeed Jo’fi Kufi, the great and extremely learned companion of the Imams (a.s.), that “he was a Raafizi who cursed the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)”1 or it is mentioned that “he was a Raafizi and an exaggerator (Ghaali).”
(Al-Ma’aaref by Ibn Qutaybah Dainawari, p. 480)
It was quoted about Umar Ibn Shimr al-Kufi that “he was a Raafizi who used to curse the companions.”
(Al-Mughni fi al-Zo’afa by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Zahabi, vol. 2, p. 54)
Most members of the illustrious and knowledgeable A’yan family were labelled as Raafizis.
(Tahzeeb al-Kamaal by Yusuf Ibn Abd al-Rahmaan Mazi, vol. 18, p.
283) Adi Ibn Saabit who is included among Taabe’in (those who saw the companions) was a resident of Kufa. He too was given the title of a Raafizi and an
(Al-Mughni fi al-Zo’afa by Muhammad Ibn Ahmad Zahabi, vol. 2, p.
54) It should be borne in mind that all these titles were given by opponents who bore hatred against Shias.
1 Zo’afa Aqeeli by Muhammad Ibn Amr Aqeeli, vol. 1, p.193
2 Taqreeb al-Tahzeeb by Ibn Hajar Asqalaani, vol. 1, p. 146
3 Kitaab al-Rejaal by Ahmad Ibn Ali al-Najjaashi, p. 10
4 Al-Amaali of Shaikh Saduq (a.r.), p. 302
5 Al-Maqaalaat al-Islamiyyeen by Abul Hasan al-Ashari, p. 33
It was written about Abu Hamza al-Sumaali, who was included among the closest companions of Imam Sajjad (a.s.), that even he was a Raafizi
2 possibly because he has narrated few traditions condemning the usurpers of the rights of Ahle Bait (a.s.). Other companions have also tried to prove that the path of the opponents, enemies and deniers of Ahle Bait (a.s.) was different from that of the Holy Quran and Sunnah. In this way, they presented the concept of Baraa’at to the lovers of Ahle Bait (a.s.). Abaan Ibn Taghlib who has narrated traditions from Imam Sajjad (a.s.), Imam Baqir (a.s.) & Imam Sadiq (a.s.) and is considered to be one of the famous personalities of Kufa
3 has narrated the famous sermon of Shiqshiqiyyah. (Ma’aani al-Akhbaar by Shaikh Saduq (a.r.), p. 361) Apart from this, he has also narrated traditions from Ikramah and Ibn Abbas, which indicate that enemy of Ali (a.s.) is the enemy of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.).
4 The indisputable book of Sulaym Ibn Qais al-Hilaali (r.a.) which consists of clear traditions condemning the usurpers gained popularity during this same time. The belief in rejection (Rafz) was so rampant during that time that any group which was not Raafizi in the true sense was also considered to be one. For example, Abul Hasan al-Ash’ari in his book Maqaalaat al-Islamiyyeen considered the Zaidis as Raafizi whereas the Zaidis were nowhere near Baraa’at.
5 Apart from this, followers of the Kaisaniyyah sect especially poets such as Kaseer Izza, a famous Kufi and a proponent of the Kaisaniyyah belief, had explicitly recited many couplets against the usurpers.
(Al-Iqd al-Fareed by Ibn Abd Rabbehi, vol. 2, p. 246)
Aforementioned examples validate the fact that Kufa had turned into a centre for Baraa’at after Aashuraa whereas prior to this, such vigour and energy regarding this belief was not found in Kufa. As a result, rebellious groups emerged against the rulers at that time, not just in Kufa but also in Madinah and other cities.
Usurping the right of Ahle Bait (a.s.), the most important factor for Baraa’at
We have already mentioned before that oppression and injustice by the Bani Umayyah upon Ahle Bait (a.s.) was not confined only to the tragedy of Aashuraa. There were completely aware that not just Ahle Bait (a.s.) but even their virtues and excellences were detrimental for the Umayyad rule. Hence, they encouraged people to criticise and condemn Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and Ahle Bait (a.s.) and refrain from narrating their virtues. Rather, they should eulogise the virtues of the previous rulers.1 They assumed that if they managed to put down Ahle Bait (a.s.) and their virtues within the Muslim community and Islamic society, their unjust rule would continue and hence, they never fell short of committing any kind of injustice and tyranny. Marwaan Ibn Hakam (may Allah curse him) confessed in front of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) that none among the companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) defended our master (Usmaan) as much as your master (Ameerul Momineen (a.s.)) did. Imam (a.s.) immediately questioned him, “Then why do you people (Bani Umayyah) curse and abuse him (Ali a.s.) from the pulpit?” The accursed retorted shamelessly, “Our rule cannot be established without it.”
(Sharh Nahj al-Balaagha by Ibn Abil Hadeed Mo’tazeli, vol. 13, p. 220)
The Bani Umayyah forced the companions of Ahle Bait (a.s.) to curse them and if the companions refused, they would be subjected to unimaginable tortures. For instance, when Rushaid Hajari, a Kufan, refused to speak against Ameeerul Momineen Ali (a.s.), Ibn Ziyaad (the accursed) the then governor of Kufa, had his hands, feet and tongue chopped off mercilessly. Saeed Ibn Jubair was brought in front of Hajjaaj Ibn Yusuf Saqafi (the accursed). He urged Saeed to praise the previous rulers and narrate their virtues. Observing dissimulation (taqayyah), Saeed remained silent. This infuriated Hajjaaj. He ordered for his immediate hanging.2 It is noteworthy that Saeed did not apparently curse or abuse. Even then he was executed. Why? The sole reason for it was that he was not inclined towards the rulers. The sensitivity among Shias can be gauged through this as a result of which there was an uproar and rebellion all around, which was weakening the Umayyad rule. Yahya Ibn Umm al-Taweel, a venerable companion of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) and the son of his nurse, used to openly prevent people from speaking against Ameerul Momineen Ali (a.s.) and on the other hand, fearlessly expressed his dissent from the usurpers and enemies of his eminence (a.s.). He declared that this dissociation is true worship. He stood on the plains of Kufa and with utter bravery and courage exclaimed: “O friends of Allah! We dissociate from whateve you are hearing. May Allah curse whoever curses Ali (a.s.)! We express our dissent from the sons of Marwaan and they do not worship except other than Allah (i.e. they are polytheists).”
(Al-Kaafi by Muhammad Ibn Yaqoob al-Kulaini, vol. 2, p. 380. H 16, chapter of Associating with Sinners)
The belief of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) and his companions was not just that the foundation of the tyrannical Umayyad rule was based on the usurpation of caliphate but they never feared from propagating this among the masses, even if that meant laying down their lives for it. It is important to mention here that Yahya Ibn Umm al-Taweel was martyred due to this very act of Baraa’at. Imam Sajjad (a.s.) prayed for him and according to a tradition from Imam Kazim (a.s.), he will be raised on the Day of Judgment among the four exclusive disciples (Hawaari) of Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.).
(Al-Ikhtesaas by Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn No’maan famous as Shaikh Mufeed (a.r.), p. 77)
1 Sharh Nahj al-Balaagha by Ibn Abil Hadeed Mo’tazeli, vol. 4, p. 56 & 58
(Al-Ikhtesaas by Shaikh Mufeed (a.r.), p. 61)
2 Ikhteyaar Ma’refat al-Rijaal by Muhammad Ibn Umar Kashi, vol. 1, p. 335
Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.) and the ideology of Baraa’at
A minute study of the character of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) helps us realise that he (a.s.) trained and guided his followers in such a way that this mode was distinct and different from other beliefs and views. While greatly emphasising the elevated divine status and position of Ahle Bait (a.s.), he proved that Imamat and Wilayat is a prerogative of only the progeny of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). He instructed his followers to remain steadfast on this belief and that they should not accept the Imamate, Caliphate and Mastership of anyone except Ahle Bait (a.s.). Rather, they should express animosity against the usurpers. Imam Sajjad (a.s.) introduced some of these aims and concepts woven in the heart of supplications and whispered prayers. Some of these supplications are available in the books of Ahle Tasannun.
(Sharh Nahj al-Balaagha by Ibn Abil Hadeed Mo’tazeli, vol. 5, p. 113;, vol. 6, p. 178;, vol. 11, p. 192)
We will quote a couple of examples for you: “My Lord! Bless the best of his household, those whom You have chosen for Your Command, appointed as treasurers of Your Knowledge, guardians of Your religion, vicegerents in Your earth, Your arguments against Your servants, purified from uncleanness and defilement througha thorough purification by Your desire and made them a medium to reach You!” (Al-Sahifahh al-Sajjadiyyah, Dua 47, verse 56) Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.) clearly mentions that Ahle Bait (a.s.) are those whom Allah has chosen for His affair i.e. Imamate, made them vicegerents on the earth and proofs upon the people. These are essential and fundamental concepts related to Imamate and Caliphate which, if pondered over, will make it evident for every wise person that Imam (a.s.) has elucidated that this is an exclusive right of Ahle Bait (a.s.) and none else.
“O Allah! This is the station of Your vicegerents,
Your chosen ones and the places of Your trust in the highest grades which You have singled out for them which has been forcibly snatched… until (due to this) Your selected representatives were overpowered, vanquished and stripped of their right.” (Al-Sahifahh al-Sajjadiyyah, Dua 48, verse 9) Here, Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.) clearly articulates that the august position of Caliphate is only for divinely appointed caliphs and the chosen ones of Allah. But those who did not deserve it usurped this holy and divine position from them. “O Allah! Curse their enemies, from the first till the last ones, the one who is pleased with their acts, their followers and adherents.” (Al-Sahifahh al-Sajjadiyyah, Dua 48, verse 10) Imam (a.s.) has cursed not just the enemies of Ahle Bait (a.s.) but also those who conform to the heinous acts of the enemies, their adherents and their followers. It is important to note that Imam Sajjad (a.s.) used to curse his enemies in his supplications and included it in his prayers. Hence, anyone who claims to be a Shia of Ahle Bait (a.s.) should consider cursing the enemies and usurpers of their rights as a sacred deed. Nevertheless, appropriate time and place should be kept in mind. Contradiction or Strategy? A quick glance at history tells us that one of the political moves of the Umayyad government during the Imamate of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) was that the virtues of previous caliphs and companions be glorified and pit the majority Muslims against the infallible Imams (a.s.) and their Shias. Hence, we find that Imam Sajjad (a.s.) foiled the Satanic propaganda of the rulers through a different way so that they do have any pretext of troubling Shias. As a result, many-a-times we find words of Imam (a.s.) in which he has apparently refrained from any kind of Baraa’at against the usurpers of caliphate and has rather eloquently concealed it in between the lines. This practice was either on account of dissimulation (taqiyyah) or to solve many problems with such meaningful statements. We narrate two traditions for you albeit briefly just to convey the point. Zaid Ibn Ali narrates that I went to Makkah with my father. A person from Taaif was complaining against the usurpers. Imam (a.s.) told him, “Fear Allah!” The man asked, “By the Lord of this Holy Ka’bah! Did the two of them participate in the funeral prayers of Fatima Zahra (s.a.)?” Imam (a.s.) replied, “By Allah! No.” Moments later, my father confided in me, “When both of them did not recite the funeral prayer of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), then what importance does Fatima Zahra (s.a.) have in their eyes?”
(Behaar al-Anwaar by Allamah Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (a.r.), vol. 29, p. 158)
In another tradition narrated by Hakim Ibn Jubair, Imam Sajjad (a.s.) advised: “You are being killed for the past sixty years for the murder of Usmaan. What would be your condition if you express Baraa’at from the two idols of Quraysh?”
(Taqreeb al-Ma’aaref by Abu al-Salaah Taqi Ibn Najm al-Halabi, p. 245)
But when this same narrator Hakim Ibn Jubair confesses his beliefs in front of Imam Sajjad (a.s.) in order to rectify his beliefs, Imam (a.s.) undoubtedly clarified about the direct Imamate and Mastership of Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) and rejected the fake positions of the usurpers.
(Manaaqeb-o-Ameer al-Momineen by Muhammad Ibn Sulayman al-Kufi, vol. 1, p. 521)
Obviously, such a practice was merely to safeguard the religion of Allah the Almighty, the Sunnah of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and to protect the lives, wealth and dignity of Shias. It is noteworthy here that never did Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.) endorse the words of the rulers throughout his life. No such proof is available in any book or tradition. On the contrary, we find that on numerous occasions, he extolled the virtues of his noble forefathers (a.s.) and narrated their traditions.
Declaration of Baraa’at and the Right of Ahle Bait (a.s.) On every possible occasion, Imam Zain al-Aabideen (a.s.) narrated the virtues and excellences of Ahle Bait (a.s.) and that caliphate was their sole prerogative. An excellent illustration of this is the sermon of Fadakiyyah by Janabe Fatima Zahra (s.a.) narrated by Zaid Ibn Ali who has quoted this from his father Imam Sajjad (a.s.). Even a cursory glance at this sermon makes it evident as to how the Lady of both worlds (s.a.) claimed Caliphate and Imamate to be their right and proved others to be usurpers. This sermon is so important that even the Ahle Tasannun scholars have quoted it in their books.1 Imam Sajjad (a.s.) made this usurpation of the right of his grandmother evident for all his companions.
(Al-Amaali of Shaikh Mufeed (a.r.), p. 281; Al-Amaali of Shaikh al-Tusi (a.r.), p. 155)
To conclude, we quote a couple of traditions narrated by Abu Hamza al-Somaali. Imam Sajjad (a.s.) prophesied: “There are three kinds of people whom Allah will not even look at on the Day of Judgment: (1) One who claims to be an Imam from the side of Allah while he is not worthy it, (2) One who denies an Imam appointed by Allah and (3) One who believes that they two had any share in Islam.”
(Tafseer al-Ayyaashi by Muhammad Ibn Mas’ood Ayyaashi, vol. 1, p. 178; Al-Kaafi by Muhammad Ibn Yaqoob al-Kulaini, vol. 1, p. 374, H. 12)
Imam Sajjad (a.s.) exclaimed: “May Allah never forgive and have no mercy for those who violated our rights, usurped our inheritance and appropriated a position that we deserved.”
(Manaaqeb Aale Abi Talib by Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn Shahr Ashob, vol. 3, p. 370)
Let us all pray that Allah the Almighty hastens the reappearance of our Imam Hazrat Baqiyatullah (a.t.f.s.) 1 Sharh Nahj al-Balaaghah by Abd al-Hameed Ibn Hibatillah Ibn Abi al-Hadeed al-Mo’tazeli, vol. 16, p. 252 who will grant the Ahle Bait (a.s.) their right, avenge the blood of the martyrs of Karbala and take those people to task who snatched the veils of the women from the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) household and imprisoned them. Aameen, O Lord of the worlds!