The Thoughts of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Regarding the Companions of the Messenger (PBUH)
The Thoughts of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei Regarding the Companions of the Messenger
(Written by: Mamoon Rashid bin Haroon Rashid Salafi)
The noble Companions, who were the pillars of this religion, the transmitters of the Shariah, the preachers of the faith, and the helpers and supporters of the noble Prophet (PBUH)—whose purity was attested by Allah Himself in the Glorious Quran and by the Messenger of Allah in his numerous Hadiths—in this article, we will examine Khamenei’s thoughts regarding these great and chaste personalities. Because nowadays, some deceived and deceptive individuals are claiming that Khamenei was a caller to the unity of the Ummah and a standard-bearer of the great alliance and harmony among Muslims; that he did not speak ill of the Companions, nor target sacred figures, but rather stopped people from taunting and ridiculing personalities revered by Muslims. However, the reality is entirely the opposite. In his own speeches and writings, he never missed an opportunity to disrespect the Companions and was always at the forefront of this matter. Yes, since he was a taqiyya-practicing (dissimulating) Rafidi and a cunning politician, he succeeded in deceiving people through the magic of words, deception, and obfuscation, making them believe that he is free from cursing and reviling, and only talks about the unity of the Ummah.
Khamenei writes about the Companions in his book “Al-Khawas,” page 58, that when the caliphate went to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), even though Ali was more deserving of it: “Apart from Fatima and a few Companions, no one helped Ali, and everyone fell upon him like dogs.”
If this is not an insult to the dignity of the Companions, then what is it, that they are compared to dogs and it is propagated that they oppressed Hazrat Ali, isolated him, and usurped the caliphate from him.
It is a matter of regret that despite this, the facilitators of Rafidism will not understand and will continue to portray him as the supreme leader and a caller to unity.
He further writes: “Thus, Ali was caught between two groups. The first group ignored his right, and the second was hypocritical and envious.” (Al-Khawas, p. 58)
Here, Khamenei is explicitly calling the Companions ‘hypocrites’ and ‘envious’. Despite this, how can any sensible Sunni say that he does not taunt the Companions? Are all these things hidden from Khamenei’s supporters, and do they only know that he ostensibly forbids cursing the Companions? Even if he forbade it on some occasion, does it hold any more value than mere political rhetoric in light of all these statements?! Especially when he is calling the Companions hypocrites and saying they fell upon him like dogs; can there be any worse abuse than this?
Then he says about Ali (may Allah be pleased with him): “Yes, he fulfilled his duty regarding the preparation and burial of the Prophet (PBUH), but unfortunately, others took unfair advantage of his preoccupation.” (Al-Khawas, p. 58)
As if the Companions—God forbid—were just waiting in ambush for Ali to be busy so they could steal the caliphate! The reality is that the Ummah was in dire need of a caliph at that time to manage the affairs of the Muslims, which is why the Companions hastened to elect a caliph. Allegiance was pledged to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), and later Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) also gladly pledged his allegiance.
But Khamenei says: “Their minds turned to stone, and the love of the world blinded their hearts.” (Al-Khawas, p. 56)
He further states: “They took advantage of his preoccupation, seized the caliphate and stole it, and deprived him of his right. And this cowardly act had extremely negative consequences.” (Al-Khawas, p. 58)
Is calling Abu Bakr, Umar, and the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) worldly, thieves, cowards, hypocrites, and usurpers of rights not an abuse? To Khamenei’s supporters, perhaps this does not count as abuse!
O unfortunate facilitators! Why do you lie to the people that he does not curse the Companions?
If someone used these words about your father, you would never tolerate it, so how do you tolerate all this about the companions of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)?
In fact, if we said the very same things about Khamenei himself, which he truly deserves, your vein of unity would throb, and you would immediately declare us ‘hypocrites,’ Zionists, and American agents, because declaring someone a disbeliever is the easiest job for you. You, the facilitators of the Akhwani movement and Rafidism, for whom calling your opponent a Zionist, disbeliever, and hypocrite is child’s play.
Khamenei, in his book “Al-Khawas,” accuses Hazrat Umar of kicking and breaking the door of Hazrat Fatima’s house and entering while violating her sanctity. He writes: “After the end of the Battle of Siffin, Hazrat Ali looked at those companions of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) who remained with him, and these thoughts and questions began to circulate in his mind: How did these people deny his right to the caliphate? And how did they leave him to burn in this alienation and loneliness? How did things completely turn upside down as soon as the noble Prophet (PBUH) passed away? And how did he come to face the sons of those Tulaqa (the freed ones) whom the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had forgiven after the conquest of Mecca?!
All these disasters and calamities began on the day when some senior Companions turned away from the will of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) on the Day of Ghadir, and the strange events that unfolded in Saqifa in the form of Abu Bakr’s election after that day, all these situations arose as a result of some Companions turning away and following worldly desires and greed. And if we assume that these people had not plotted against the government and caliphate as they did, the rest of the Companions would also have remained obedient to the command of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), the tribulation would never have had the chance to rear its head, and this would have been recorded as a stance from them that history would never forget.
Was Umar not present on the Day of Ghadir? Was he not aware of the status and rank of the Ahl al-Bayt? Did he not know the status of Fatima? Then how did he allow himself to stand at Ali’s door and call out: ‘By the One in whose hand is Umar’s soul, either you come out or I will burn this house down along with whoever is inside it.’
Then it was said to Umar: The daughter of the Messenger of Allah, Fatima, is present in the house.
So Umar unhesitatingly replied to them: So what if Fatima is inside!
Then Umar kicked the door, broke it, and entered. Then the voice of Sayyida Zahra rose, crying out to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH): ‘O father, O Messenger of Allah! …’. So Ali became severely furious and, to teach them a lesson, placed his hand on the hilt of his sword. Then he removed his hand from his sword and slowly calmed down, and whispering to the soul of the Messenger of Allah, he said: ‘O my mother’s son (brother)! These people considered me weak and were about to kill me….’.” (Al-Khawas, p. 59)
Is relying on such false and fabricated events to accuse Hazrat Umar, taunting the Companions for worldliness, and holding them responsible for the misguidance of the Ummah and its differences not cursing, taunting, and reviling?! Is Khamenei praising these Companions and showering flowers on them through these statements?
Similarly, on page 61, he writes that Umar prevented the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) from writing a will for the caliphate in the name of Hazrat Ali.
Khamenei, in his book “Inna al-Nasr Ma’a al-Sabr” (Indeed, Victory is with Patience), praises those who send curses upon the Companions. Accordingly, he writes on page 138: “Sayyid Nazari was an extremely devout worshipper. I remember he used to recite the ‘Ziyarat Ashura’ aloud every day. (Everyone knows what is in the text of Ziyarat Ashura). He would send blessings and peace upon the Ahl al-Bayt and curse their enemies, and then he would continue this litany while walking on the streets.”
In the Shia context, ‘cursing the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt’ simply means cursing Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them). Anyone who is familiar with Shia beliefs knows this; yet despite this, Khamenei is setting this cursing and reviling as a standard and declaring him a devout worshipper and ascetic.
In his book “Al-Khawas, p. 63,” while taunting the eminent Companion who was promised Paradise, Hazrat Abd al-Rahman bin Awf (may Allah be pleased with him), he writes: “Abd al-Rahman did not have the courage to oppose openly, so he resorted to deceit and trickery… And when Abd al-Rahman juxtaposed the conduct of the Sheikhain (Abu Bakr and Umar) against the Book of Allah and the prophetic Sunnah, he actually shot the final arrow from his quiver of malice and enmity against the front of truth and its Imam, because he knew very well how strictly the Imam adhered to the sacred Shariah. And through this deception, Abd al-Rahman bin Awf and his faction succeeded in diverting people from the axis of truth and justice; and thus, Imam Ali (peace be upon him) was left alone, without a helper or supporter, and his right was usurped. His condition was such that his heart was tearing apart due to the pains and sufferings he endured at the hands of these people and others like them.”
He further writes: “And it is astonishing about Abu Bakr that he accuses others of causing division, while forgetting that he was the first person to disperse the gathering of Muslims and (abandoning the burial of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)) went off with his faction to ‘Saqifa’ to collude over the matter of the caliphate; they wove webs of such conspiracies behind the scenes whose purpose was to usurp (the caliphate by snatching it from its rightful owner).” (Al-Khawas, p. 57)
Accusing the senior Companions of preferential treatment without merit, nepotism, worldly desires, and the greed and lust for wealth, he writes: “All these events occurred seven years after the death of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), and the very first signs of these (deviations) appeared when it was said: ‘Those who preceded in Islam—meaning those companions of the Messenger of Allah who participated in battles with him—cannot be equal to common people; there must be special privileges for them!’ Therefore, they were given financial privileges from the Public Treasury (Bait al-Mal). This was the first brick of (discriminatory treatment), and the nature of all deviant movements is that they start from a small point and then their intensity increases with every step.
These deviations started from here until the era of Uthman arrived, where by the middle of the third Caliph’s rule, the situation reached a point that the major companions of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) became the richest people of their time. Meaning those renowned Companions: like Talha, Zubayr, and Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas, etc., who had great achievements, they became the first tier of capitalists; to the extent that when one of them died and his wealth was being distributed among the heirs, the gold which he had melted and shaped into bricks (ingots), had to be broken with axes, exactly the way wood is split with an axe. Just imagine how huge the quantity of gold must be that it needed to be broken with axes? Whereas the reality is that gold is weighed in milligrams and grams!
These are the facts that history has preserved! These are not things about which it can be said that only Shias have recorded them in their books, not at all, rather everyone has written this. The amounts of dinars and dirhams these people left behind were mind-bogglingly vast! And this was the situation that led to incidents like those (wars and tribulations) during the era of the Commander of the Faithful (Ali ibn Abi Talib, peace be upon him); meaning because the importance of ‘position’ and ‘wealth’ had exceeded the limits for some people, they chose the path of conflict with him. By then, twenty-five years had passed since the death of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), and many mistakes and blunders had taken root (in society).” (Al-Khawas, p. 30)
Read further, Khamenei has taunted the lineage of the companion of the Messenger, Abdullah bin Amr bin al-Aas, falsely accused his mother of adultery, and declared him an illegitimate child. He writes: “Amr bin al-Aas bin Wa’il bin Sahm belongs to the Banu Sahm tribe, and according to the narration cited by Al-Zamakhshari, his mother was a slave girl from the Anzah tribe, who was brought to Mecca as a captive in a war, and Abdullah bin Jud’an al-Taymi bought her. She was among the adulterous women. Consequently, in a single night, Abu Lahab, Umayya bin Khalaf, Hisham (bin al-Mughira), Abu Sufyan, and al-Aas bin Wa’il committed adultery with her, resulting in her pregnancy and the birth of Amr (bin al-Aas).
Upon the birth of this child, a dispute broke out among these five men, and each claimed that Amr was his son. Finally, the decision was left to his mother, so she said: ‘This is the son of al-Aas bin Wa’il, and I conceived this pregnancy from him.’ The reason for this choice was that al-Aas bin Wa’il had paid this woman more wages compared to her other companions; that is why, for the sake of material benefit, she attributed him to al-Aas?!” (Al-Khawas, p. 74)
And on page 76 of the same book, he establishes the heading: “Amr bin al-Aas, who sold his religion in exchange for the world,” and then he unleashes a barrage of accusations against Amr bin al-Aas and Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with them).
He writes further: “Muawiyah, Amr bin al-Aas, Ibn Abi Mu’ayt, Habib bin Maslama, and Ibn Abi Sarh (Abdullah bin Sa’d); these people were neither religious nor the people of the Quran (meaning they had no connection with religion and the commandments of the Quran)… They were the worst children in their childhood, and they proved to be the worst men when they grew up.” (Al-Khawas: 82-83)
After dividing the opponents of Hazrat Ali into three categories: Qasitin (the unjust), Nakithin (the oath-breakers), and Mariqin (the renegades), Khamenei mentioned a fourth category, a group of the Companions whom he refers to as the elite of the Muslims (Khawas al-Muslimeen). After that, he wrote: “And all these individuals were among the causes of this tribulation, because they continuously deterred people from gathering around the leadership of the Imam. The leading figures of this group included Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas, Abu Sa’id al-Khudri, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari, Abdullah bin Umar, Muhammad bin Maslama, and Abu Mas’ud al-Ansari.
It is noteworthy that Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas and Abu Sa’id al-Khudri are among those narrators who have transmitted hadiths and narrations regarding the Verse of Purification (Ayat al-Tathir) that was revealed in honor of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), Ali, Fatima, Hasan, and Husayn. How strange it is that on the one hand, they considered Ali as the instigator of warfare and tribulations, and on the other hand, they also narrated such hadiths in his honor that bear witness to the fact that he is pure from all kinds of impurity and protected from every mistake and blunder.
Furthermore, most of these individuals are those who were eyewitnesses to the Day of Ghadir and are among the narrators of its hadith.” (Al-Khawas: 67)
Similarly, Khamenei has called the Companion of the Messenger Ya’la bin Munya a thief and accused other Companions, including Hazrat Aisha, of murder, oppression, and tyranny. He writes: “After the assassination of Hazrat Uthman, when Hazrat Ali took the reins of the caliphate, Talha and Zubayr demanded from the Imam to appoint them as the governors of Basra and Kufa. But the Imam did not accept their request and appointed two other individuals over those two cities. A few days after this incident, Talha and Zubayr departed for Mecca under the pretext of performing Umrah, and there a group of Banu Umayya led by Marwan bin Hakam also joined them, while Aisha had already arrived there prior to the events of Hazrat Uthman’s assassination.
Abdullah bin Amir, who had been the governor of Basra, and Ya’la bin Munya, who was the governor of Yemen appointed by Hazrat Uthman, also came and joined these people. After their gathering in Mecca was complete, they agreed to advance toward Basra along with six hundred fighters. For this expedition, financial assistance and backing were obtained from those funds which Ya’la bin Munya had stolen from the Muslims’ Public Treasury during the era of Hazrat Uthman.
When these people reached Basra, the governor of the city, Uthman bin Hunaif, fiercely confronted them, and after a brief skirmish, a peace treaty was signed. Then, on a dark, stormy night with fierce winds, Talha, Zubayr, and their companions raided the governor’s house of Basra, while Uthman bin Hunaif was completely unaware and oblivious to them. They took fifty individuals from the guards of the Public Treasury as prisoners, and after binding them in chains, brutally murdered them. This tragic incident is considered the first crime of murder in Islam. After this, they attacked Uthman bin Hunaif, tied him tightly with ropes, and plucked the hair of his beard in such a way that nothing was left in it, not leaving even a single hair.” (Al-Khawas, p. 69)
Do you want more examples of taunts and ridicule? For this, study Khamenei’s book Al-Khawas, which is full of disrespect towards the dignity of the Companions, and of taunting, ridiculing, and cursing them.
Khamenei, in his book ‘Al-Duroos al-Azimah min Seerat Ahl al-Bayt’ (Great Lessons from the Biography of the Ahl al-Bayt), p. 17, declares Hazrat Muawiyah (may Allah be pleased with him) a ‘despicable person’, and not only that, but he sends curses upon him and all of Banu Umayya. Accordingly, he writes in his book ‘Al-Nida’ al-Akhir’ (The Final Call), p. 19: “And you know that cursing Banu Umayya—may Allah curse them—and raising a voice against their oppression and tyranny—despite the fact that they have perished and have been dispatched to Hell—is actually a cry of protest against the oppressors of the entire world, and this is so that this cry, which shatters oppression to pieces, can be kept alive forever.”
Similarly, in another of his books, ‘Tarikh al-Imam al-Khomeini’ (History of Imam Khomeini), p. 245, he writes: “And you know that cursing Banu Umayya—may Allah curse them—and raising a voice against their oppression and tyranny—despite the fact that they have perished and have been dispatched to Hell…”
Now just think, who are the Banu Umayya? The foremost among Banu Umayya include Hazrat Uthman bin Affan, Hazrat Muawiyah, and Hazrat Abu Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with them). And he is cursing them and saying that they have all been dispatched to Hell, and yet people say that Khamenei does not taunt the Companions! Does not insult sacred figures! And calls for unity.
He writes further: “And it is obligatory that they (the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt) be mentioned (in mourning gatherings) and be cursed.”
Meaning, he is declaring it obligatory to curse and taunt the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt—who, in the view of the Rafidis, are actually the noble Companions—and the facilitators of Rafidism say that Khamenei is innocent.
Now where are those people who claim that he does not taunt the Companions and stops others from speaking ill of the Companions? Whereas he himself is saying that it is necessary to curse the Banu Umayya in mourning processions and gatherings, and to condemn them vigorously.
Regarding the Companion of the Messenger, Abu Sufyan (may Allah be pleased with him), he writes: “Narrators have frequently mentioned that (at this critical juncture) Abu Sufyan apparently assumed the guise of a passionate supporter of Hazrat Ali; so he began to intimidate and challenge, saying: ‘By God! I will fill the streets of Medina with horses and foot soldiers against them (those who usurped the caliphate).’ But this reality was not hidden from Ali (peace be upon him) that Abu Sufyan’s behavior was merely to sow discord among the Muslims and stoke the fire of tribulation; so that he and other people like him, who had concealed polytheism and hypocrisy in their hearts, could get an opportunity to achieve anti-Islamic objectives.” (Al-Khawas, pp. 55-56)
In his book “Al-Khawas,” he has declared the eminent Companion Abdullah bin al-Zubayr (may Allah be pleased with him) a liar and a false witness. Accordingly, he writes on page 65: “He brought fifty men who testified that this water is not the water of Haw’ab. And this was the first false testimony given in Islam.”
This itself is a fabricated story, based upon which a Companion is being called a liar.
Those who defend Khamenei by saying that he does not taunt Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) are lying. Yes, there is a faction of Shias that slings mud at the chastity of Sayyida Aisha, whereas Khamenei’s faction does not do so overtly and publicly, but does he not taunt her in other contexts?
Khamenei writes on the same page of the same book: “And the ignorant (Jahili) thoughts began to permeate among them (the Companions) once again, and religion gradually became a means of acquiring worldly interests and material benefits.”
He did not mention the name of Sayyida Aisha here, but see in the very next sentence upon whom he fits this taunt, writing: “The Messenger of Allah had prophesied these events before his death when he was sitting in his house one day in the presence of Aisha and some other wives. The Prophet (PBUH) said: «كَأَنِّي بِإِحْدَاكُنَّ قَدْ نَبَحَتْهَا كِلَابُ الْحَوْأَبِ، وَإِيَّاكِ أَنْ تَكُونِي أَنْتِ يَا حُمَيْرَاءُ» (It is as if I see the dogs of Haw’ab barking at one of you, and beware, O Humayra (Aisha), lest it be you).”
Through this in his book, Khamenei wants to propagate that the personality who used religion for worldly interests and adopted ignorant thoughts (God forbid) was Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her).
Imam Al-Dhahabi (may Allah have mercy upon him), while describing the levels of Shias, says: “If a Shia progresses to the point of speaking ill of the Sheikhain (Abu Bakr and Umar), then he is a wicked Rafidi.” (Siyar A’lam al-Nubala 7/370)
Imam Sufyan al-Thawri (may Allah have mercy upon him) was asked if prayers can be offered behind a person who abuses Abu Bakr and Umar? He replied: “No.” (Sharh Usul I’tiqad Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah by al-Lalika’i, Hadith: 2813)
Imam Abu Zur’ah al-Razi (may Allah have mercy upon him) states: “When you see a person degrading any companion of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), then know that he is a heretic (Zindiq).” (Al-Kifayah by Al-Khatib, p. 49)
