Abstract

This article analyzes and compares key concepts in the hadiths related to the succession of Imam Ali (AS) from the methodological perspective of Mir Hamid Hussain. By utilizing his principles of exegesis and hadith interpretation, the article meticulously examines the implications of the Hadith of Manzila (Hadith of Position) and the Hadith of Ghadir. It emphasizes how these hadiths should be understood and interpreted through Mir Hamid Hussain’s methodology, particularly through the application of principles such as “carrying meaning to a deeper level” and “one hadith interpreting another.” A notable aspect of this research is its focus on Mir Hamid Hussain’s methodological approach in analyzing the interpretive and hadith-based implications, which sheds light on the deeper dimensions of Imam Ali’s (AS) position in Islamic history.

Initially, by relying on the principle of “carrying meaning to a deeper level,” the apparent differences between the statements of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) regarding the succession of Imam Ali (AS) and his historical counterparts, such as Harun (AS) in relation to Musa (AS), are analyzed. This principle demonstrates that the only distinction between Imam Ali (AS) and Harun (AS) lies in prophethood, while other shared aspects such as brotherhood, ministry, and succession remain common.

Additionally, by utilizing the principles of hadith studies and referencing Suyuti’s book *”Al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir,”* examples are provided of interpreting expressions in metaphorical and deeper meanings. These evidences indicate that certain phrases in the Prophetic hadiths may require an interpretation different from their apparent meaning to clarify the Prophet Muhammad’s intention in conveying more profound concepts.

Next, the principle of “one hadith interpreting another” is applied to gain a more precise understanding of the meanings of the Hadith of Ghadir and other related hadiths. Through this methodology, the author extracts a more accurate and clearer meaning of the words and phrases, while also explaining the concept of wilayah (guardianship) and the succession of Imam Ali (AS) within the context of authentic hadiths.

Finally, the article, by referring to the principle of “the necessity of applying a shared term to all its meanings in the absence of a specific qualifier,” examines the hadith *”Indeed, Ali is from me, and I am from Ali, and he is the guardian (wali) of every believer after me.”* It emphasizes all the meanings of the term *”wali.”* This analysis demonstrates that the term *”wali”* in this hadith must be interpreted as “priority in authority” and its other meanings to provide a more precise indication of the guardianship (wilayah) of Imam Ali (AS) over other believers.

This research scientifically and methodically examines interpretive and hadith-related points within the framework of fundamental principles. It emphasizes the necessity of paying attention to details and various comparisons to achieve a deeper understanding of the scholarly and religious status of Imam Ali (AS) in Islamic history.

Argumentation through Hadith: Examining Issuance, Authenticity, and Implications.

To use a hadith as evidence on any subject, in addition to investigating its authenticity and verifying its validity, the hadith’s implication must also be examined. Implication refers to what is understood from the text based on linguistic rules, literature, and various contextual indicators. Some of the texts cited, such as Quranic verses, are unanimously accepted by all Islamic sects. Moreover, many texts are considered definitive in transmission due to their mutawatir status or their association with conclusive indicators. Nevertheless, the definitive authenticity of a hadith does not exempt the researcher from examining its implication.

The Necessity of Examining Implication: Why is the Implication of a Hadith Important?

The necessity of this discussion becomes evident when everyone acknowledges the authenticity of a hadith, but there is disagreement over its implications. In such cases, different interpretations of the expressions are presented, sometimes conflicting with one another. This conflict in interpretations may render the text unsuitable for argumentation. The late Sayyid Mir Hamid Hussain Hindi, after examining the chain of transmission and proving the widespread transmission (tawatur) of the texts, analyzes the implications of the hadiths. In the following, we will examine his method of analyzing these implications.

The method of the late Mir Hamid Hussain in arguing through texts.

The late Mir Hamid Hussain adhered to the principles of research and debate in arguing through texts. The general outline of his method in examining implications is as follows:

Argumentation based on the narrations of Ahl al-Sunnah, not Shi’a narrations.

This is one of the principles of research—and even the most important one. Therefore, Sayyid adhered to this principle in all his research. He even relied on the narrations of Ahl al-Sunnah in historical events and biographies. This is entirely evident to anyone who even once glances through this book from beginning to end, and there is no need to prolong the discussion.

Direct Reference to Sunni Books

He does not, however, cite Sunni reports through Shia books; rather, he references them directly from Sunni sources—except in rare cases. For instance, he does not say, “Murtada quotes Ahmad in his Musnad as saying…,” but instead directly refers to the Musnad of Ahmad or cites the report from one or more Sunni scholars.

Reasoning Based on the Sources and Principles Accepted by the Opponent

This method, by utilizing credible sources and principles, minimizes conflicts and disputes. By building trust, reducing psychological resistance, and strengthening logic, it helps the audience make more informed decisions. With this approach, debates shift from confrontation to constructive and fair dialogue. The outcome of this method is a reduction in tensions and an objective understanding of reality, free from biases. This approach reflects the mastery of Mir Hamid over the subject, ensuring arguments are free from any fallacies.

Reference to Credible Sunni Books

He does not cite or rely on just any book for narrations and hadiths; rather, most of his citations and trust are based on the most significant and renowned Sunni books on hadith. Some of these books include:

The Six Authentic Collections (Al-Sihah al-Sitta) and their commentaries, Al-Muwatta and its commentaries, and Al-Jam‘ bayn al-Sahihayn.   Al-Jam‘ bayn al-Sihah al-Sitta (The Compilation of the Six Authentic Collections).   Mu’jam al-Tabarani (The Collections of Tabarani). 

 Al-Mustadrak ‘ala al-Sahihayn (The Supplement to the Two Sahihs).

These examples pertain to reports and hadiths. However, regarding other sciences, he refers to the books of Ahl al-Sunnah in every field and discipline. For instance, in the field of Quranic exegesis, he consults works such as   Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Azim by Ibn Kathir of Damascus   and Tafsir al-Jalalayn.  

In the field of the biography (sīrah) and virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt, for example, he refers to books such  as Al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, commonly known as Sirat Ibn Hisham. 

*Insan al-Uyun* by Nur al-Din al-Halbi.   *Al-Sira al-Nabawiyya* by Ahmad Zayni Dahlan. 

In the field of lexicography, he refers to many books, including the following: 

*Al-Mabsut* by Shams al-Din al-Sarakhsi.  *Bada’i al-Sana’i* by al-Kasani.  *Al-Hidayah* and its commentaries. 

In the principles of jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh), he refers to the following books 
– *Al-Mukhtasar* by Ibn al-Hajib and its commentaries 
– *Al-Usul* by Al-Sarakhsi 
– *Al-Usul* by Al-Bazdawi and its commentaries. 

To identify fabricated (Mawdu’) hadiths, as well as distinguish between famous (Mashhur) and widely transmitted (Mutawatir) hadiths, the following sources are referred to: 

*Al-Mawdu’at* by Ibn al-Jawzi.  *Al-La’ali al-Masnu’ah* by al-Suyuti.  *Al-Ta’qubat ‘ala al-Mawdu’at* by al-Suyuti.

To identify weak narrators, fabricators (wad’een), and those who engage in tadlis (manipulating the chain of narration), the following sources are referred to: 

 *Al-Du’afa wa al-Matrukin* by al-Bukhari.   *Al-Du’afa wa al-Matrukin* by al-Nasa’i.   *Kashf al-Ahwal fi al-Rijal* by Abd al-Wahhab al-Madrasi. 

In the field of *Dirayah* (the science of analyzing and evaluating hadith) and the principles of narration (*Qawa’id al-Tahdith*), the following sources are referred to: 

*Ulum al-Hadith* by Ibn al-Salah.   *Al-Taqyid wa al-Idah* by Zain al-Din al-Iraqi.   *Al-Taqrib* by al-Nawawi. 

In the field of *Ilm al-Kalam* (theology and doctrinal discussions), the following sources are referred to: 

*Sharh al-Maqasid* by al-Taftazani.   *Sharh al-Mawaqif* by al-Jurjani.  *Sharh al-Tajrid* by al-Qushji. 

In the field of *Tarajim al-Ulama* (biographies and accounts of scholars), the following sources are referred to: 

*Ithaf al-Wara bi Akhbar Umm al-Qura* by Ibn Fahd al-Makki.   *Akhbar al-Akhyar* by Abd al-Haqq al-Dehlawi.  *Akhbar Isbahan* by Abu Nu’aym al-Isfahani. 

In the field of *Gharib al-Hadith* (difficult and rare words in hadith) and *Arabic linguistics* (sciences related to the Arabic language), the following sources are referred to:

Al-Nihaya* by Ibn al-Athir.   Al-Fa’iq by Al-Zamakhshari.  Majma’ al-Bihar* by al-Fattani. 

Similarly, in books on ethics, Sufism, spiritual conduct, and even in books of lectures, humor, stories, and literature, he refers to the books of Ahl al-Sunnah in all these matters.

Emphasis on the reliability of sources: The methodologies of the late Mir Hamid Husain.

In many instances, he emphasizes the reliability of the book from which he quotes or cites. His methodology in this regard is as follows:

1. Quoting the words of *Kashf al-Zunun.

   Through this method, he confirms the name of the book, the name of its author, and the authenticity of the book’s attribution to its author.

The book *Kashf al-Zunun ‘an Asami al-Kutub wa al-Funun* by Hajji Khalifa is one of the most important bibliographic sources in Islam. Hajji Khalifa’s methodology in this book to confirm the name of the book, the name of its author, and the authenticity of the book’s attribution to its author is as follows:

1. Referencing reliable sources: Using historical and classical bibliographic sources to verify information.  

2. Mentioning evidence and indicators: Providing evidence such as quotations and historical documents to prove the attribution of the book.
 

3. Examining the chain of transmission and narrators: Analyzing the chain of transmission and narrators, if available, to confirm the authenticity of the book.  

4. Comparison with other works of the author: Comparing the content and style of the book with other works of the author to confirm attribution.  

5. Mentioning the opinions of other scholars: Using the opinions of other scholars as evidence to confirm or reject attribution.

2. Mentioning the narration of scholars from the book in books of *Ijazat* (licenses) and documents.

   This practice confirms the reliability of the book through quotations by other scholars.

3. Mentioning those who have quoted from the book and relied on it.

   This method demonstrates that the book has been trusted by prominent figures.

4. Mentioning those who have used the book as a source and explicitly referred to it in the introduction of their own works.

   This indicates the widespread use of the book among scholars.

5. The introduction of the book:

   In the introduction of the book, the author commits to quoting from reliable sources and including trustworthy reports.

The impact of this methodology in debate and research.

In addition to the undeniable impact of this methodology in achieving objectives and sufficiency in debate, the author, by emphasizing the reliability of books and sources from the perspective of opponents, demonstrates a commitment to academic integrity, honesty, and dedication to seeking the truth. By meticulously citing sources and avoiding distortion, he upholds responsibility toward the truth. Furthermore, by fostering a fair environment, he strengthens fairness and justice in discussions. These methods not only enhance the credibility of arguments but also contribute to scientific and social progress. This approach serves as an ethical model for every researcher.

The response of the late Mir Hamid Husain to the claims of fanatics.

Some fanatics among Ahl al-Sunnah, out of ignorance or willful neglect, claimed that relying on the books of opponents is evidence that Shi’a lack books, narrations, and scholars, and that in every claim they make, they are dependent on Ahl al-Sunnah. Ibn Rozbahan, in his rebuttal to Allamah al-Hilli, said:

“It is astonishing that this man does not narrate any hadith except from the community of Ahl al-Sunnah, for the Shi’a have no books, narrations, or scholarly jurists who can extract reports. Therefore, he is dependent on Ahl al-Sunnah to prove his claims.”

Sayyid (may Allah have mercy on him) was not unaware of this misconception or willful neglect. Therefore, in his discussion about certain hadiths (such as the Hadith of Light), he narrated phrases through the Imami Shi’a, from the pure Imams (peace be upon them)  and from the Prophet of Mercy (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), as a response to the words of Ibn Rozbahan and those who share his views. This demonstrates his mastery over both Shi’a and Sunni sources and his ability to utilize both to prove the validity of his arguments.

Relying on the understanding of the companions: A key to understanding Prophetic hadith.

One of the important methods in scientific and religious arguments is referring to the understanding of the companions. The companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family), especially those who in some cases opposed Imam Ali (peace be upon him), are recognized as references and authorities in disputes and disagreements regarding the interpretation of Prophetic hadith. This matter is significant for several reasons:

Among his methods of argumentation to prove his viewpoint is referring to the understanding of the companions. This is because the understanding of the companions—especially those who opposed Ali (peace be upon him)—is considered authoritative and a reference in disputes and disagreements regarding the meaning of Prophetic hadith. This is due to the following reasons:  

1. Because they are considered just according to the well-known view of Ahl al-Sunnah. 

2. Because they were contemporaries of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) and were present during the events. They witnessed the issuance of the disputed hadith, heard it, and memorized it.  

3. And because they were native speakers (with a precise understanding of the Arabic language). 

Therefore, it is appropriate to refer to their understanding. This is exactly what Sayyid has done in some of his research. Here, we mention some examples:  

Examples of relying on the understanding of the companions.

Therefore, it is appropriate to refer to their understanding. This is exactly what Sayyid has done in some of his research. Here, we mention some examples:  

Regarding the meaning of *”Man kuntu mawlahu fa Ali mawlahu” (For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master).

The companions understood from what the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said on the day of Ghadir Khum the same meaning that the Shi’a believe in: 

1. Amir al-Mu’minin (peace be upon him) asked the people about (the hadith of Ghadir) and requested those who were present on that day and heard the words of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) to testify. 

Do you think that he (peace be upon him) understood anything from this hadith other than Imamate? 

2. If the meaning of (the hadith of Ghadir) was something other than “Imamate” from the meanings of “Wilayah,” then why did a group of companions refuse to testify? And why did he (peace be upon him) curse those who did not testify?  

3. And why did *”A questioner asked about a punishment about to befall the disbelievers, which none can avert”* (Surah Al-Ma’arij, verse 1)… 

Did he understand “Imamate” from the sermon? Did he not say to the Prophet: *”…Then you were not satisfied until you raised the hand of your cousin and gave him superiority over us and said: For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master…”*?  

4. And Hassan ibn Thabit al-Ansari said in his poem on the day of Ghadir: 

“I have accepted you after me as an Imam and a guide.” 

5. And Abu Tufayl denied (the hadith of Ghadir). He said: “I went out with something in my heart.”
 

6. And Abu Ayyub al-Ansari and a group of companions came to Amir al-Mu’minin (peace be upon him) and said: *”Peace be upon you, O our master.”* He (peace be upon him) said: *”How can I be your master while you are Arabs?”* They said: *”We heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) say on the day of Ghadir Khum: ‘For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master.'”  

7. And Abu Bakr, Umar, and other companions and the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) congratulated Ali on the day of Ghadir and said: *”Congratulations to you, O Ali, you have become my master and the master of every believing man and woman…”*  

8. And Umar, in response to someone who said to him: *”You are treating Ali in a way you do not treat any of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family),”* said: *”He is my master.”*  

9. And to someone who refused Ali’s judgment, he said: *”Woe to you! Do you not know who this is? This is my master.”*  

10. And Ibn Hajar al-Makki in *Al-Sawa’iq* said regarding the aspects of responding to the hadith of Ghadir: 

*”The third aspect: We accept that he is the most deserving, but we do not accept that the intended meaning is priority in Imamate; rather, it is priority in following and closeness to him, as in the Quranic verse: ‘Indeed, the most worthy of Abraham among the people are those who followed him’ (Surah Al-Imran, verse 68). And there is no definitive or even apparent evidence to negate this possibility. Rather, this is what Abu Bakr and Umar understood, and they are well-known in hadith. For when they heard it, they said to him: ‘O son of Abu Talib, you have become the master of every believing man and woman.’ This narration has been reported by Darqutni. It has also been narrated that Umar was told: ‘You are treating Ali in a way you do not treat any of the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).’ He said: ‘He is my master.'”*  

The Hadith of the Bird: A Deep Look at the Most Beloved Creation of God.

The Hadith of the Bird is one of the most famous and debated hadiths in Islamic history, interpreted in various ways. In this hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) prays:  

“O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You and to Your Messenger, so that he may eat with me from this bird.” 

(O Allah, send the most beloved of Your creation to You and to Your Messenger to me, so that he may eat with me from this bird). 

Dahlawi, one of the commentators, has claimed that the meaning of *”أحب”* (most beloved) in this hadith refers to *”the most beloved in eating.”* However, this interpretation faces serious challenges, especially considering the understanding of the companions and historical narrations that indicate the meaning of *”أحب”* goes beyond merely eating.

Sayyid (may Allah have mercy on him) responded to Dahlawi’s claim as follows:

Sayyid  (may Allah have mercy on him) responded to Dahlawi’s claim by presenting 70 points. One of the most important of these points is *referring to the understanding of the companions*. The companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) understood from this hadith what the Shi’a believe: that Imam Ali (peace be upon him) is the most beloved creation of Allah to the Prophet and to Allah.  

The narration of Malik ibn Anas: Historical evidence.

The narration of Malik ibn Anas clearly shows how the companions understood this hadith. In this narration, it is stated:  

*”A roasted partridge (حَجل (حُجول) in Arabic refers to a bird similar to a quail or partridge) was gifted to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family). The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: ‘O Allah, send the most beloved of Your creation to You to me, so that he may eat with me from this food.’ Aisha said: ‘O Allah, make it my father.’ Hafsa said: ‘O Allah, make it my father.’ Anas said: ‘I said: O Allah, make it Sa’d ibn Ubadah.'”*

However, in the end, it was Imam Ali (peace be upon him) who responded to the Prophet’s call and entered. This narration shows that the companions were also aware that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* is the most beloved creation of Allah.    

Key questions about Dahlawi’s interpretation.

1. Is the eagerness of Aisha, Hafsa, and Anas for someone other than Ali to be the *”most beloved in eating”* natural?

If the meaning of *”أحب”* was merely the *”most beloved in eating,”* why were Aisha, Hafsa, and Anas so eager for someone other than Imam Ali (peace be upon him) to hold this position? Does this not indicate that they also knew *”أحب”* meant the most beloved to Allah and the Prophet؟   

2. What harm would there have been if Ali was the *”most beloved in eating”?  

If the meaning of the hadith was merely about eating, why was this matter so sensitive? Does this not indicate that the hadith refers to something far more significant than a meal?

3. Would Anas ibn Malik have committed a major lie for such a trivial matter?

Anas ibn Malik clearly states in his narration that it was Imam Ali (peace be upon him) who responded to the Prophet’s call. Can it be imagined that Anas lied about such a matter? This shows that the hadith refers to something far more significant than eating.

The connection between the Hadith of the Bird and the will of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).

This incident reminds one of the Prophet’s (peace be upon him and his family) will during his illness. At that time, the Prophet ordered that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* be invited to write the will and lead the prayer. However, Aisha and Hafsa suggested that Abu Bakr or Umar should be invited instead. This parallelism shows that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* has always been the most beloved and closest to the Prophet.       

The narration of Ibn Abbas and Aisha.

In a narration from *Ibn Abbas*, it is stated:   

 *”The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) said: ‘Send for Ali and invite him.’ Aisha said: ‘If you send for my father, it would be better.’ Hafsa said: ‘If you send for Umar, it would be better.'”*  

This narration shows that even in the final moments of the Prophet’s life, *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* was recognized as the most beloved to him. 

  The understanding of the companions: The key to solving the puzzle.

The understanding of the companions regarding the Hadith of the Bird and other similar narrations clearly shows that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* was the most beloved creation of Allah to the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family). Dahlawi’s interpretation, which considers *”أحب”* to mean the most beloved in eating, is not consistent with historical and narrational evidence. Therefore, referring to the understanding of the companions and historical narrations is the key to correctly understanding this hadith and emphasizing the unparalleled status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* before Allah Almighty and the Prophet of Mercy.
       

Analysis of three important hadiths about Imam Ali (peace be upon him).

In Islamic narrations, there are three important hadiths that demonstrate the special status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* in the eyes of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) and within the Islamic system. These hadiths are:   

1. The Hadith of Wilayah: *”Man kuntu mawlahu fa Ali mawlahu”* (For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master).  

2. The Hadith of the Flag: *”I will give the flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger.”*  

3. The Hadith of Position: “You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me.”  

These hadiths not only confirm the position of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* as the successor of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) but also demonstrate his wilayah (authority), love, and status in Islam. Below, we analyze these three hadiths and the understanding of the companions regarding them.

1. The Hadith of Wilayah: *”Man kuntu mawlahu fa Ali mawlahu”* (For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master).

This hadith, which was delivered at Ghadir Khum, is one of the most important hadiths regarding the Imamate and wilayah (authority) of Imam Ali (peace be upon him). The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his family) said in this hadith:  

“من کنت مولاه فعلی مولاه”

*”Man kuntu mawlahu fa Ali mawlahu”* (For whoever I am his master, Ali is his master). 

The understanding of the companions regarding the Hadith of Wilayah.

Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas narrates that Mu’awiyah taunted *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*, but he responded with anger: 

“You are saying these words about a man to whom I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) grant three qualities and say: ‘If I had even one of these qualities, it would be more beloved to me than the world and all that is in it.'”

Sa’d then referred to the Hadith of Wilayah and emphasized that this hadith demonstrates the wilayah (authority) of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*. 

Key question.

Can it be imagined that the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) meant something other than wilayah (authority) and leadership by *”مولای”* (master)? If that were the case, why would companions like Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas present this hadith as evidence of the superiority of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*?

2. The Hadith of the Flag:

*”I will give the flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger.”*

This hadith is also one of the signs of the love and special status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*. The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said:  

*”I will give the flag to a man who loves Allah and His Messenger.”*

And then he gave the flag to *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*.

The understanding of the companions regarding the Hadith of the Flag.

Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas mentioned this hadith as one of the three superior qualities of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*. This hadith shows that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* was not only beloved to Allah and His Messenger but also deserving of leadership and carrying the flag of Islam.

 Key question.

If the meaning of this hadith was merely a military matter, why did the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) present it as one of the superior qualities of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*? Does this not indicate his position of leadership and wilayah (authority)?

3. The Hadith of Position:

“You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me.”

This hadith, which is…  The Hadith of Position, which is well-known, establishes the position of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* as…  the deputy and successor of the *Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)*. The Prophet said:
   

“You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me.”

The understanding of the companions regarding the Hadith of Position.

Despite his animosity and hostility towards Amir al-Mu’minin (peace be upon him), Mu’awiyah understood the superiority of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (peace be upon him) from the Hadith of Position.

And even in response to someone who asked him to answer instead of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*, he said:
 

“What a bad thing you have said! You dislike a man whom the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) filled with abundant knowledge.”

This shows that even Mu’awiyah acknowledged the knowledge and status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*.
Ibn Hajar al-Makki and others have narrated (and the wording is from him): *”Ahmad narrated that a man asked Mu’awiyah a question. Mu’awiyah replied: Ask this question to Ali, for he is more knowledgeable. The man said: O Amir al-Mu’minin! Your answer is more beloved to me than Ali’s answer.
Mu’awiyah said: What an unpleasant thing you have said! You dislike a man whom the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) described as having abundant knowledge. The Prophet said to him: ‘You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me.'”*
Umar, too, whenever he faced ambiguity in a matter, would ask *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* and seek his opinion.

Other narrations with the same meaning have also been reported, but some of them add that Mu’awiyah said to the man: *”Get up! May Allah not make your feet firm,”* and he removed the man’s name from the register.
Umar also always asked *Ali (peace be upon him)* and sought his advice. I myself have seen that whenever Umar faced a problem, he would say: “Is Ali here?”
 

Key question.

If the meaning of this hadith was merely a simple analogy, why did Mu’awiyah and others acknowledge the knowledge and status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*? Does this not indicate his special position as the successor of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family)?

The wilayah (authority), love, and status of Imam Ali (peace be upon him).

These three hadiths clearly show that *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* holds a special position in Islam. The *Hadith of Wilayah* emphasizes his leadership and authority, the *Hadith of the Flag* highlights his love and suitability for military and religious leadership, and the *Hadith of Position* indicates his role as the deputy and successor of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).
       

The understanding of the companions regarding these hadiths also confirms that they considered these narrations as evidence of the superiority of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*. Even those like Mu’awiyah, who disagreed with him, acknowledged the knowledge and status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)*. Therefore, these hadiths not only confirm the status of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* as the most beloved creation of Allah and His Messenger but also emphasize the necessity of following him as the rightful successor of the Prophet (peace be upon him and his family).

In the meaning of the Hadith of Analogy.

Abu Bakr understood from the Hadith of Analogy the same meaning that the Imamiyyah (Shi’a) understand. 

In a narration from Harith al-A’war, it is stated: 

It has reached us that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) said to a group of his companions: 

 “I will show you Adam in his knowledge, Noah in his understanding, and Abraham in his wisdom.”

Suddenly, Ali (peace be upon him) appeared. 

Abu Bakr said: “O Messenger of Allah, are you comparing a man to three prophets?! Blessed be this man! Who is he, O Messenger of Allah?”
   

The Prophet (peace be upon him and his family) said: “Do you not recognize him, O Abu Bakr?”
  

Abu Bakr said: “Allah and His Messenger know best.”
   

The Prophet said: “He is Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Abi Talib.”
   

Abu Bakr said: “Blessed be you, O Abu al-Hasan! And where is the like of you, O Abu al-Hasan?!”
 

Argument based on established principles.

In every field of knowledge, there are established and accepted principles among its scholars, and no argument should contradict any of these principles; rather, it must align with them. Otherwise, the argument will not be complete and will not reach the desired conclusion.  

And in none of the arguments of the author of *’Abaqat* will you find any contradiction with any of the established principles in any field of knowledge. On the contrary, in every case requiring investigation, you will see a strong argument based on the agreed-upon scientific principles of the scholars. When he refers to a principle, he cites examples of the reasoning of great scholars from their various books to prove its validity. Here, we mention some of these principles:

The principle of “Preferring the affirmative over the negative.”

In narrations and reports, there are sometimes conflicts and discrepancies that disrupt the understanding of the implication of the narration. In such cases, the researcher examines the preferences, indications, and evidence to find the correct text. In one objection, Fakhr al-Razi considers the lack of narration by some as evidence of the hadith being false or baseless. In this regard, in response to Fakhr al-Razi’s claim, the late Mir Hamid Husayn al-Hindi refers to the principle of…  “Preferring the affirmative over the negative.” According to this principle, the statement of someone who has narrated an event or hadith takes precedence over the statement of someone who has remained silent or denied that event.
 

This is a general principle that Sayyid (Mir Hamid Husayn) relied on in responding to Fakhr al-Razi’s objections regarding the Hadith of Ghadir. Among Razi’s arguments was that Bukhari and Muslim did not narrate the Hadith of Ghadir. Sayyid responded to each part of his argument in a separate chapter, which includes valuable content, important discussions, and multiple aspects.  

One of these aspects is giving precedence to the statements of narrators who have reported the Hadith of Ghadir over those who have denied it—and even those who have remained silent—based on the principle of *”Preferring the affirmative over the negative.”* This is a principle that scholars of hadith, jurists, usul scholars, and literary figures have relied upon.
 

Examples of applying the principle of *”Preferring the affirmative over the negative.”

1. The Prophet’s (peace be upon him and his family) prayer in the Kaaba.

In the book *”Al-Sira al-Halabiyya,”* in the discussion about whether the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him and his family) prayed in the Kaaba on the day of the conquest of Mecca, it is stated: 

 “Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) affirms the prayer in the Kaaba, while Usama denies it, and the affirmative takes precedence over the negative.”

 2. The manner of the Prophet’s (peace be upon him and his family) sitting during prayer.

In the book *”Zad al-Ma’ad fi Hady Khayr al-‘Ibad”*—regarding the manner of the Prophet’s (peace be upon him and his family) sitting during prayer and whether he moved his finger while pointing—two hadiths are mentioned:
   

– One from Abu Dawud, from Abdullah ibn Zubayr, which states: “He did not move it.”
 

– Another from Abu Hatim, from Wa’il ibn Hujr, which states: “And he moved it.”
 

Then, he addresses the first one and, among other things, says: 

 *”And also, in the hadith of Abu Dawud, it is not mentioned that this was during prayer, so if it was during prayer, it would be negative, and the hadith of Wa’il is affirmative, and the affirmative takes precedence.”*

3. Examining the word *”Mashwara”* (consultation).

In the book *”Al-Fath al-Wahbi,”* while examining whether the word *”Mashwara”* has one form or two, it is reported from some lexicographers that it has only one form, and from others that it has two forms.
  

And then, by preferring the second opinion, he says: 

 *”And the affirmative takes precedence over the negative, and the one who has memorized is evidence against the one who has not memorized.”*

The principle of *”Preferring the affirmative over the negative”* and the Hadith of Ghadir.

By relying on a principle that is also prevalent among the great scholars of the opposing side, the ignorance or willful neglect of Fakhr al-Razi becomes evident. A neglect that sought to erase a truth as significant as the Hadith of Ghadir. The principle of…  “Preferring the affirmative over the negative“* clearly shows that the affirmative narrations about the Hadith of Ghadir—which have been reported by numerous reliable narrators—take precedence over the denial or silence of others. This principle is not only accepted and relied upon among the Shi’a but also among Sunni scholars. Therefore, Fakhr al-Razi’s claims about the lack of authenticity of the Hadith of Ghadir are refuted by this accepted and scientific principle, and the status of this hadith as one of the most important proofs of the wilayah (authority) of *Imam Ali (peace be upon him)* is confirmed.
 

The principle of “Not interpreting an exception as separate when it is possible to interpret it as connected.”

 Definition of the principle:

This principle states that if there is an exception in a sentence, it should first be considered as connected, unless there is definitive evidence indicating that the exception..   is separate. The reason for this principle is that a connected exception…   is the reality, and a separate exception…  is metaphorical, and the default in speech is to interpret it literally unless there is evidence to the contrary.

The scientific foundations of the principle.

1. Literal and metaphorical meanings in the science of Usul (principles of jurisprudence):  

The default is that words and sentences are used in their literal sense unless there is definitive evidence indicating a metaphorical meaning.

2. Linguistic economy:  

The principle of *”Not interpreting an exception as separate”* is based on the principle of linguistic economy, meaning that the speaker aims to convey their message with the least ambiguity and the greatest precision.

3.  Textual and contextual evidence: 

To determine whether an exception is connected or separate, attention must be paid to textual evidence (such as sentence structure) and contextual evidence (such as the circumstances of the speech).

Application of the principle to the Hadith of Position.

The Hadith of Position: 

«أنت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي» 

*”You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me.”*

Analysis of the exception in the hadith:

In this hadith, the exception…  *”Except that there will be no prophet after me“* exists. Sayyid argues that this exception should be considered as *connected*, because:
   

1.  Lack of definitive evidence: 

There is no evidence in the hadith indicating that the exception should be considered as separate.

2..  Interpretation as literal: 

The default in speech is to interpret it literally, and a connected exception is the literal meaning.

3. Semantic coherence:  

If the exception is considered as connected, the hadith is interpreted coherently and without contradiction.

The meaning of the hadith with a connected exception.

If the exception is considered as *connected*, the meaning of the hadith will be:
   

– Imam Ali (peace be upon him) is like Harun (Aaron) to Musa (Moses) in every aspect except prophethood, because there will be no prophet after the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his family).

In this case, the exception only refers to the difference in prophethood, and the other aspects of the analogy (such as brotherhood, ministry, succession, and support) remain.

The rest of the positions are of the nature of prophethood.

Prophethood is an exception from the rest of the positions. In the case of a connected exception, prophethood is of the same kind as the other positions that have not been excepted. Consequently, those positions that have not been excepted are all divine offices that no ordinary human can share in without divine selection.

The meaning of the hadith with a separate exception.

If the exception is considered as *separate*, the meaning of the hadith changes:  

– Imam Ali (peace be upon him) is like Harun (Aaron) to Musa (Moses) in every aspect, but know that there will be no prophet after me.

In this case, the exception is an independent sentence emphasizing the finality of prophethood and has no direct connection to the analogy of Ali (peace be upon him) to Harun. In this scenario, there is no connection or similarity between prophethood and the positions that have not been excepted. Prophethood is a status that will have no connection with the other positions, and it will not be necessary for all positions to be present in the sacred existence of Amir al-Mu’minin (peace be upon him). This is the goal that Dahlawi aims to achieve by introducing the idea of a separate exception.

The metaphorical nature of a separate exception.

A separate exception can only be used metaphorically, meaning that the *exception is not inherently separate*. That is, the exception should not be divided into two types: one connected and the other separate. Just as no one considers metaphorical meaning as part of the literal meanings of a word. For example, no one says that the word *”asad”* (lion) has two meanings: one meaning a lion (the wild animal) and the other meaning a brave man. Therefore, just as the word *”asad”* never means a brave man, an exception also never means separate unless there is evidence and reason provided that the exception is used in a context other than what it was originally intended for (metaphorically).
 

Mir Hamid Husayn’s argument based on the principle.

The late Mir Hamid Husayn (may Allah have mercy on him), using the principle of *”Not interpreting an exception as separate when it is possible to interpret it as connected,”* proves that the exception in this hadith must be considered as connected. He argues that:

1.  A connected exception is the literal meaning: 

The default in speech is to interpret it literally, and a connected exception is the literal meaning.

2. A separate exception is metaphorical:  

A separate exception is metaphorical and is only used when there is definitive evidence indicating it.

3. Lack of definitive evidence:  

In this hadith, there is no evidence indicating that the exception should be considered as separate.

The foundational sources of the opponents.

Mir Hamid Husayn has relied on authoritative sources such as *”Al-Mukhtasar”* by Ibn Hajib, *”Al-Minhaj”* by Baydawi, *”Al-Talwih”* by Taftazani, and *”Kashf al-Asrar fi Sharh Usul al-Bazdawi”* by Abd al-Aziz al-Bukhari. These sources emphasize the principle of *”Not interpreting an exception as separate when it is possible to interpret it as connected”* and have accepted it as a fundamental principle of Usul (principles of jurisprudence).

The principle of *”Interpreting according to the meaning.”*

The principle of *”Interpreting according to the meaning”* is one of the literary principles used in the interpretation of religious texts, especially hadiths. This principle states that sometimes a phrase or sentence is interpreted beyond its apparent meaning, in a way that a deeper and more precise meaning is inferred. This principle has also been used in the interpretation of the Hadith of Position (*”You are to me as Harun (Aaron) was to Musa (Moses), except that there will be no prophet after me”*).

Application of the principle to the Hadith of Position.

In the Hadith of Position, the phrase…  *“Except that there will be no prophet after me“* exists. Sayyid (and other Shi’a scholars), relying on the principle of *”Interpreting according to the meaning,”* interpret this phrase as *”Except prophethood.”* This means that the exception in this hadith only refers to the matter of prophethood, and the other aspects of the analogy (such as brotherhood, ministry, succession, and support) remain.       

The meaning of the hadith with interpretation according to the meaning:

– Imam Ali (peace be upon him) is like Harun (Aaron) to Musa (Moses) in every aspect except prophethood, because there will be no prophet after the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his family).

– In this interpretation, the exception only refers to the difference in the matter of prophethood, and the other aspects of the analogy (such as brotherhood, ministry, succession, and support) remain.

Examples of the principle of *”Interpreting according to the meaning”* in the book *”Al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir”* by Suyuti.

Sayyid (may Allah have mercy on him), in explaining this principle, has referred to examples from the book *”Al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir”* by Suyuti. This book is one of the important sources in the science of Usul (principles of jurisprudence) and Arabic literature, which examines linguistic and interpretive principles. In this book, numerous examples of interpreting phrases according to deeper and more precise meanings are provided, which can be used as evidence for the principle of “Interpreting according to the meaning.”
    

Examples mentioned in the book:

1. Interpreting a phrase according to its metaphorical meaning:  

In some cases, phrases are interpreted according to their metaphorical meanings. For example, the phrase *”asad”* (lion) may be used to mean a brave man.

2. Interpreting a sentence according to a deeper meaning:  

In some sentences, the apparent meaning of the sentence is interpreted according to a deeper meaning. For example, the phrase *”لا نبي بعدي”* (there will be no prophet after me) may mean emphasizing the finality of prophethood and the end of the line of prophets. 

By using the principle of *”Interpreting according to the meaning,”* the phrase *”إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي”* in the Hadith of Position is interpreted as *”إلا النبوة”* (except prophethood). This interpretation shows that Imam Ali (peace be upon him) is like Harun (Aaron) to Musa (Moses) in every aspect except prophethood. This principle is strengthened by referring to the examples mentioned in the book *”Al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir”* by Suyuti and is accepted as a literary and interpretive principle.
           

The principle of *”One part of a hadith interprets another part.”*

This is a hadith-based principle. Sayyid, in some of his research, when arguing based on a hadith or refuting a statement, has relied on this principle. For example:

1. His argument on the implication of *”mawla”* in the Hadith of Ghadir:  

Sayyid, using other phrases that more clearly indicate the meaning of *”priority in authority,”* interprets the word *”mawla”* in the phrase *”Man kuntu mawlahu fa hadha mawlahu”* (For whoever I am his master, this is his master).
  

2. His argument with evidence and supports for the hadith *”I am the city of knowledge”*:  

Sayyid, using evidence and supports for the hadith *”I am the city of knowledge,”* refuted Yusuf al-Wasiti’s interpretation of the word *”Ali”* in the hadith. Yusuf al-Wasiti considered the meaning of *”Ali”* to be *”elevation and height,”* but Sayyid, relying on this principle, explained the correct meaning.
     

Great scholars of hadith, such as Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in *”Fath al-Bari,”* have also relied on this principle in explaining hadiths and their meanings.
   

The principle of *”The necessity of interpreting a shared term in all its meanings in the absence of a qualifier.”*

This principle states that if a word has multiple meanings (a shared term) and there is no evidence to specify it to one of those meanings, the word must be interpreted according to all its meanings.

Sayyid, in arguing based on the hadith: 

«إن علیاً مني و أنا من عليّ و هو ولي كل مؤمن من بعدي»

*”Ali is from me and I am from Ali, and he is the guardian of every believer after me,”* 

has relied on this principle. Here, the word *”wali”* is interpreted according to all its meanings, including *”priority in authority,”* after disregarding the immediate implication of this specific meaning in this noble hadith.
   

Therefore, even if different meanings have been expressed for the word *”wali”*—whether these meanings actually exist or are merely fabricated to distort and mislead the community—in any case, when there is no evidence for the audience to determine which meaning was intended by the speaker, according to this principle, all meanings of the word *”wali”* must be considered, and the word must be interpreted according to all those meanings.
   

Although the immediate implication of the word *”wali”* is *”priority in authority”* (and this immediate implication itself is a sign of the truth of that meaning), even if we disregard the immediate implication, one of the meanings of *”wali”* is certainly *”priority in authority,”* and this meaning must also be applied to the word *”wali.”* Therefore, this narration certainly indicates that one of its meanings is *”the priority in authority of Amir al-Mu’minin Ali (peace be upon him) over all believers.”*

Final words.

The book *”Abaqat al-Anwar”* by Mir Hamid Husayn is a valuable intellectual and scientific treasure in the history of Islamic law and knowledge, offering a new and profound perspective on understanding hadith and interpretive implications. With its precise methodology and scientific principles, this book, especially in discussions about the succession of Imam Ali (peace be upon him) and the related hadiths, goes beyond simple and superficial interpretations, leading to a deeper and more precise understanding.

Since the works of Mir Hamid Husayn are of great scientific and interpretive importance in explaining complex hadith and jurisprudential concepts, it is essential to pay more attention to introducing and studying his works. Researchers and enthusiasts in the field of religious sciences should utilize these books to better understand the various dimensions of hadith and interpretation and take further steps in clarifying the history of Islam.

However, beyond the scientific content of this work, a significant question arises: Are this book and the methodology of Mir Hamid Husayn sufficiently recognized in the academic and religious community? Have we utilized this great potential to expand scientific discussions? These discussions should continue not only in academic circles but also in public and media spaces.

This text is just the beginning for more dialogues. Whether in agreement or disagreement, everyone can contribute to a fruitful and structured discussion by sharing their opinions and perspectives. We invite you to share your thoughts in the comments, critique, and share this text with others. Through this discussion and dialogue, we can achieve a deeper and better understanding of these scientific works and methodologies, and by expanding these discussions, we can benefit from their scientific potential. This is an opportunity we should not miss.

Author: Hamed Sarem.

 This text has been rewritten and organized based on the book *“Nafahat al-Azhar“* by Ayatollah Sayyid Ali Milani. In this rewrite, the main content has been presented with changes in expression and the addition of explanatory notes to convey a better understanding of the concepts to the audience. At the same time, no major changes have been made to the original content, and this work is considered an analysis and rewrite of part of the introduction of the aforementioned book.
  

Methodology: In this writing, an effort has been made to use the original sources of the book and my personal interpretations in a coordinated manner, while respecting the intellectual property rights of the original author. Some sentences have been rewritten in a simpler and more understandable form, and new interpretive points have been added.

Conclusion: This text is presented as a rewrite and analysis of *”Nafahat al-Azhar,“* aiming to facilitate the understanding of the main concepts and adapt them to the contemporary needs of society, while fully respecting the rights of the original author.