Sahaba - The Blessed

following Monday. He would have repeated his order within the
intervening days if he had wished to do so. If there had been
something to be recorded, he would necessarily have repeated his
demand. This event is an animated document indicative of the
value and honour of Hadrat ’Umar in the view of the Messenger
of Allah. He could not be blamed for having said, “Ask him
(again). I am afraid he must have said so in a state of delirium
(due to his fever),” to prevent others’ attempt to fetch a pen and
paper. Indeed, he would have meant, “The Prophet will not talk
wildly (under normal conditions). He will always tell the truth.
Ask him again for confirmation.” Nevertheless, there is not an
authentic report ascribing the utterance of the words, “... he must
have said so in a state of delirium,” to Hadrat ’Umar. What is even
more farcical is the preposterous allegation that “The Messenger
of Allah was going to write an order designating Hadrat Alî as his
Khalîfa. That was why Hadrat ’Umar prevented others from
getting a pen and paper.” It is a squalid attempt of divination on
past people’s inner intentions. Had it been necessary to write the
would-be Khalîfa’s name, Hadrat Abû Bakr ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ
’anh’ also would have done so. In fact, it was during that period of
illness when the blessed Messenger said to Hadrat Âisha: “Send
for your father Abû Bakr! I shall write (out a document) for him,
for I am afraid that someone may come forward with the claim
that he is more eligible than Abû Bakr for caliphate. It is Abû
Bakr, alone, whom Allâhu ta’âlâ and the Believers will approve.”
This hadîth-i-sherîf is written in Muslim. Thereafter the blessed
Prophet ordered, “Leave (here, and let) me (be) by myself!” That
prophetic order shows that he wished the Refîq-i-a’lâ (to be with
Allâhu ta’âlâ).
Question: Hadrat ’Uthmân ‘radiy-Allâhu ta’âlâ ’anh’
appointed his kinsmen to important positions. Is it something
justifiable?
Answer: So did Hadrat Alî. Those great people cannot be
criticized for such practices. Likewise, Hadrat Alî did not apply
qisâs (retaliation) on Hadrat ’Uthmân’s murderers. He did not
show deference to Abû Mûsa-l-Ash’ârî and Abû Mes’ûd Ansârî.
He failed to prevent bloodshed among Muslims. He did not join
the Holy War of Tabuk. These facts do not detract from Hadrat
Alî’s great honour. On the contrary, Hadrat ’Uthmân’s kindness
towards his kinsmen was something Islam advised. By doing so, he
attained the thawâb promised for Sila-i-rahm. Besides, he did all
– 290 –