Distorting historical facts – Part 3

In our previous treatise, we mentioned a few instances wherein historical facts were distorted to suit the objectives of those who had usurped the rights of the Ahle Bait (a.s.). Here we cite another example of this evil trait.

The companions of the infallible Imams (a.s.) were akin to the common people. But the underlying difference between them and the others was the fact that the companions because of their unconditional submission to the mastership of the successors of the Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a.), would submit completely to the Holy Quran and the Ahle Bait (a.s.) and accustom themselves with the divine knowledge and customs.

These commoners were groomed under the infallible Imams (a.s.) in religion and were fortunate to learn the customs and traditions and would offer their services to the Imam (a.s.) of the time. Depending on the time and situation, the Imam (a.s.) would also draw their attention towards their mistakes and reform them.

History has reported few incidents in this regard and the benefit of educating and nurturing saw the rise of few individuals who were a source of pride and guiding lights for the Shias in history and an exemplar for the believers.

Certain narrations, which were based on the teachings and training of Imams (a.s.), have sadly been distorted by the naïve and avaricious people.

These people were perpetually in the quest to narrate traditions, which would tarnish the image of the close companions of the Imams (a.s.). To that end, they deliberately ignored reports in which the Imams (a.s.) had honoured and glorified them.

Pay close attention to the following passage:

“Since the Ahle Bait (a.s.) were loved and respected by the Muslims, the enemies of Islam, the opportunists and usurers endeavoured to show themselves attached to them in order to reach their personal motive of gaining eminence and standing in the eyes of the people.

The Imams (a.s.) were well aware of this and they made it clear that many of their followers aren’t longing for the satisfaction of Allah but they are merely desirous of gaining self-respect and worldly benefits.

For instance this squint-eyed (احؤل) man was a complete fanatic. He would only narrate things which Imam Sadiq (a.s.) did not approve of. Eventually, he was presented as a mindless fanatic.”

This write-up was an attempt to malign the image of ‘Noman The Squint-eyed’, regarded as Momin-e-Taaq (r.a.) and was also one of the greatest companions of Imam (a.s.). The author has apparently sourced this article from the utterances of Imam (a.s.) and attempted to malign the character of Momin-e-Taaq (r.a.).

The real motive behind this destructive work was that all those reports which have been sourced from this companion and are now in our hands have been the cause of humiliation for the enemies and opponents of Shias.

Contrary to the views of the Ahle Sunnah, Shias don’t hold any companion to be infallible. Rather they say that though the companions were nurtured under the Imams (a.s.), but at times they were vulnerable to committing errors. At this point, like a compassionate teacher, the Imam (a.s.) would reform them after making them conscious of their mistakes.

There is no connection between their being truthful and the traditions narrated by Imam (a.s.). In history, such problems have always been present and faced by every person. But, surprisingly, when these problems are noticed in a companion of the infallible Imams (a.s.), then the enemies of Ahle Bait (a.s.) remember him as an ‘opportunist’, ‘bigot’ and ‘usurer’.

Strangely, for the companions of Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.s.), such titles are never used. On the contrary, discussion on the justice of the companions (which effectively implies the infallibility of the companions) comes to the forefront.

We have discussed about the best of the companions such as Abu Jafar Momin-e-Taaq (Noman the squint-eyed) (r.a.). He is such a great companion that in order to defend the truth, he stood up against Abu Hanifa (the leader of the Hanafis). History has recorded these facts.

Consequently, we bring to you historical evidence which have been quoted from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) and has reached us.

Regarding the credibility and reliability of Momin-e-Taaq, Allama Hilli (r.a.) writes:

ثِقَةٌ وَ كَانَ يُلَقَْبُ بِالْاَحْوَلِ وَالْمُخَالِفُوْنَ يُلَقِْبُوْنَهُ بِشَيْطَانِ الطَْاقِ كَانَ كَثِيْرُالْعِلْمِ حُسْنُالْخَاطِرِ

(Momin-e-Taaq) was reliable and was given the title ‘Ahwal’ (which means squint-eyed) but enemies have given him the title of Shaitan-e-Taaq. His knowledge was vast and his memory very strong.

Did you notice how the enemy is going against the decree of Quran and naming a Muslim and a believer “Shaitan?” By doing so, they are proving that they are the disciples of Shaitan.

2) Imam Jafar Sadiq (a.s.) says:

عَنْ اَبِىْ عَبْدِاللهِ (ع) اِنَْهُ قَالَ اَرْبَعَةَ اَحَبُْ النَْاسِ اِلَيْ اَحْيَا ءً وَ اَمْوَاتًا بُرِيْدُ الْعِجْلِىْ وَزُرَارَةَ وَ مُحَمَْدَبْنَ مُسْلِمٍ وَ الاَحْوَلِ

“From the dead and alive, I love four people Buraid al-Ajlee, Zuraarah, Mohammad b. Muslim and Ahwal (Momin-e-Taaq).”

Rejal al-Kashee, page 240

Of course, the enemies were well aware of which of the followers and companions of the infallible Imams (a.s.) were to be attacked because ‘the bigger the lie, easier the acceptance’. For that the enemies targeted him from among the companions of Imam (a.s.) because he had complete trust of Imam (a.s.) in him.

3) When Imam Sadiq (a.s.) heard the arguments of Momin-e-Taaq al-Ahwal (r.a.) he said,

فَمَا تَرَكْتَ لَهُ مَخْرَجًا اَخَذْتَهُ مِنْ بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَمِنْ خَلْفِه

You have surrounded him from all the four sides and there is no way for him to escape.

Such instances like the debates of the beloved companions of Imam Sadiq (a.s.), which brought the enemies to their knees, can be found in the chronicles of the Ahle Bait (a.s.).

Take a look at how the unethical historians have tried to disfigure the righteous and the best of companions of Imam (a.s.). See how this trustworthy companion of Imam (a.s.), Abu Jafar Momin-e-Taaq (r.a.) is remembered by history as a ‘bigot,’ ‘unjust’, ‘opportunist’ ‘usurer’ and an ‘enemy of the religion.’