Fabricated Story of ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) Worshipping Before the Muslim Ummah
Author: Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad Anwar Zāhid (ḥafiẓahullāh)
It is narrated from Ḥabbah bin Juwain that ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) said:
“I worshipped Allah alongside the Messenger of Allah ﷺ at a time when no one from this Ummah was worshipping Him, and this worship continued for about five or seven years.”
Some Shīʿī sources, such as Mullā Bāqir al-Majlisī in Jalāʾ al-ʿUyūn, even embellish the story with strange additions—for example, claiming that when Fāṭimah bint Asad gave birth to ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه), he sucked the Prophet’s ﷺ fingers and gained oceans of knowledge, and on the third day recited verses from Sūrah al-Muʾminūn, allegedly revealed to him before the Prophet ﷺ had received prophethood.
These narratives are irrational and contradict the established chronology of Islam, and are only acceptable to those who place sectarian literature over authentic sources like Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī.
Imām al-Dhahabī says he was from the tribe of ʿUraynah in Kūfah, an extremist Shīʿa, and attributed absurd reports to ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه)—such as claiming that eighty Badrīs were with him at Ṣiffīn, which is impossible.
[Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 2/188]
Final Ruling: It is baseless and should be rejected.
Author: Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad Anwar Zāhid (ḥafiẓahullāh)
The Claim
It is narrated from Ḥabbah bin Juwain that ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) said:
“I worshipped Allah alongside the Messenger of Allah ﷺ at a time when no one from this Ummah was worshipping Him, and this worship continued for about five or seven years.”
Some Shīʿī sources, such as Mullā Bāqir al-Majlisī in Jalāʾ al-ʿUyūn, even embellish the story with strange additions—for example, claiming that when Fāṭimah bint Asad gave birth to ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه), he sucked the Prophet’s ﷺ fingers and gained oceans of knowledge, and on the third day recited verses from Sūrah al-Muʾminūn, allegedly revealed to him before the Prophet ﷺ had received prophethood.
These narratives are irrational and contradict the established chronology of Islam, and are only acceptable to those who place sectarian literature over authentic sources like Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī.
Analysis of the First Narrator – Ḥabbah bin Juwain
- Ibn al-Jawzī: This narration is fabricated in the name of ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه); Ḥabbah is a liar.
- Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn: His ḥadīth is worthless.
- Saʿdī: Unreliable.
- Ibn Ḥibbān: An extreme Shīʿa, very weak in ḥadīth.
[Taqrīb 1/148; al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl 3/1130; Tahdhīb al-Kamāl 1/220]
Imām al-Dhahabī says he was from the tribe of ʿUraynah in Kūfah, an extremist Shīʿa, and attributed absurd reports to ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه)—such as claiming that eighty Badrīs were with him at Ṣiffīn, which is impossible.
[Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 2/188]
Analysis of the Second Narrator – al-Ajlaḥ bin ʿAbdullah
- Imām Aḥmad: Narrated many munkar (rejected) reports.
- Abū Ḥātim al-Rāzī: His ḥadīth is not a proof.
- Ibn Ḥibbān: Does not even understand what he is narrating.
- al-Nasāʾī: Weak, held bad views.
- Yaḥyā al-Qaṭṭān: I have doubt about him.
- Ibn ʿAdī: A Shīʿa who tells the truth, but al-Jawzajānī says he fabricates.
[Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 1/209; Tahdhīb al-Kamāl 1/71; Taqrīb 1/49; al-Kāshif 1/99; al-Jarḥ wa al-Taʿdīl 2/347; Mawḍūʿāt Ibn al-Jawzī 2/237; Ṭabaqāt Ibn Saʿd 7/327]
Contradictions with Authentic History
- This claim contradicts the well-established precedence of Abū Bakr (رضي الله عنه), Khadījah (رضي الله عنها), and Zayd bin Ḥārithah (رضي الله عنه) in embracing Islam.
- If ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) had been worshipping for 7 years without anyone knowing, how does that align with the fact that ʿUmar (رضي الله عنه) accepted Islam in the 6th year of prophethood and was the 40th Muslim?
- Ibn al-Jawzī highlights that this false claim clashes with multiple authentic reports regarding the first believers.
Conclusion
- This narration is fabricated (mawḍūʿ) and created to exaggerate the status of ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) in a sectarian context.
- The chain contains two unreliable narrators—both heavily criticised by ḥadīth masters.
- It opposes authentic historical accounts and sound ḥadīth.
Final Ruling: It is baseless and should be rejected.
