Shia Objections on the Sahabah (RA) — A Scholarly Refutation

➤ A Scholarly Refutation of Shia Objections Against the Noble Companions (RA)
Source: Fatāwā ‘Ilmiyyah, Vol. 3 – Principles, Verification of Narrations, and Their Rulings, Page 196


الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام علىٰ رسول الله، أما بعد!


Shia Objections & the Defense of the Ṣaḥābah (RA): An Analytical Response


Shia circles frequently raise objections against the Sahabah (رضي الله عنهم) — especially against the Rightly Guided Caliphs and Sayyidunā Mu‘āwiyah (رضي الله عنه). These objections aim to instill doubts in the hearts of common Muslims. It is essential to respond to such claims with scholarly rigor so that seekers of truth may distinguish between fact and fabricated polemics, and escape the darkness of ignorance and misguidance.


Below is a systematic response to some of the common Shia objections:

❖ ① The Issue of Sayyidah Fatimah’s (RA) Alleged Anger​

Reference: Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (Hadith: 4240, 4241, 6726)


Claim: Fatimah (RA) was angry with Abū Bakr (RA) due to his refusal to hand over her inheritance (Fadak, Khaibar).


Explanation:

• When Fatimah (RA) requested her share from the Prophet’s ﷺ estate, Abū Bakr (RA) said:

"لَا نُورَثُ، مَا تَرَكْنَا صَدَقَةٌ"
"We (prophets) are not inherited from; whatever we leave is charity."

• He stated he would adhere to the exact practice of the Prophet ﷺ concerning such matters.

Regarding the narration:


"فَهَجَرَتْهُ فَلَمْ تُكَلِّمْهُ حَتَّى تُوُفِّيَتْ"
"So she avoided him and did not speak to him until her death."


This does not imply enmity or wrongdoing, but a temporary emotional withdrawal, which is not uncommon among noble personalities during sensitive times. The refusal was based on a sound ḥadīth, not personal animosity.

❖ ② Did Sayyidah Fatimah (RA) Reconcile Later?​

Narration: al-Sunan al-Kubrā by al-Bayhaqī


"ثم ترضاها حتى رضيت"
"Then he (Abū Bakr) kept trying until she was pleased with him."

• Weakness of Chain:
  
  • Ismā‘īl ibn Abī Khālid — though thiqah, is mudallis.
  • The narration is mursal.

However, supported by other authentic reports, e.g., Musnad Aḥmad (1/14), reconciliation is established.

❖ ③ Did Mu‘āwiyah (RA) Command to Curse ‘Ali (RA)?​

Claimed Source: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (6220)

• The narration mentions:

"أمر معاوية بن أبي سفيان سعدًا..."
"Mu‘āwiyah ordered Sa‘d..."


However, no clear wording of abuse or insult exists.


Scholarly Position:

• Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ and Ibn Abī Zayd al-Qayrawānī state:
  
  There is no explicit command of cursing in the narration.
  
  
• The often quoted "Riyāḍ al-Naḍrah" narration is unsourced and unreliable.

❖ ④ al-Bidāyah wa’n-Nihāyah Alleged Abuse​

"ثم ذكر علي بن أبي طالب، فوقع فيه"
(al-Bidāyah 7/377, Tārīkh Dimashq 42/119)

• Narrators:
  
  • Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq — mudallis, no explicit mention of hearing.
  • ‘Abdullāh ibn Abī Kayjah — mudallis, narration is ‘an‘anah.
• Chain is disconnected, thus rejected.

❖ ⑤ Sunan Ibn Mājah: “فنال منه”​

"فَنَالَ مِنْهُ"
(Ibn Mājah 121)

• The chain is interrupted.
• ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Ṣābit did not directly hear from Sa‘d ibn Abī Waqqāṣ.
• Though Shaykh al-Albānī initially authenticated it, he later retracted his position.

❖ ⑥ al-‘Iqd al-Farīd – Not a Valid Source​

By: Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih al-Andalusī

• The book lacks chain of narration, and its content is questionable.
• Not a Hadith source, and not relied upon in verifying historical reports.

❖ ⑦ Musnad Aḥmad and Musnad Abī Ya‘lā: “مَنْ سَبَّ عَلِيًّا، فَقَدْ سَبَّنِي”​

"Whoever abuses ‘Ali has abused me."
(Musnad Aḥmad 6/323, al-Mustadrak 3/121, Ibn Abī Shaybah 12/76)

• Chain Analysis:
  
  • Abū Isḥāq — mudallis, narration is via ‘an‘anah.
  • Chain is weak.

❖ ⑧ al-‘Ibar fī Khabar man Ghabar: "وأن لا يسب عليًا بحضرته"​

• Narrator: Mujālid ibn Sa‘īd — known to be weak
• Chain is incomplete, therefore not acceptable.

❖ ⑨ Tārīkh Abī al-Fidā’: "وأن لا يشتم علياً"​

• No chain provided — thus rejected.

❖ ⑩ al-Bidāyah wa’n-Nihāyah: "أن لا يسب علي"​

• Again, no chain provided — unacceptable in hadith sciences.

❖ ⑪ Tārīkh Dimashq: "ولا يسب علي"​

• Narrator: Mujālid ibn Sa‘īd — classified as weak.
• al-Haythamī said:
  
  "ضعفه الجمهور" — "The majority declared him weak."
  

❖ Conclusion:​

The majority of Shia claims against the Companions (RA) rely on:


✘ Weak (ḍa‘īf) or
✘ Disconnected (munqaṭi‘) narrations
✘ Unsourced or fabricated content
✘ Historically unreliable books


None of these claims can be substantiated through authentic narrations.

Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā‘ah Belief:​

• All Companions (RA) are upright (‘udūl), reliable, and pillars of this religion.
• Speaking ill of them is a grave sin, and respecting them is a core tenet of faith.

"وَالسَّابِقُونَ الْأَوَّلُونَ مِنَ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالْأَنْصَارِ... رَّضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ"
(Surah at-Tawbah: 100)


Date: 26 March 2013
ھذا ما عندي، والله أعلم بالصواب