Author : Imam Reza Network

Husham Bin Al­Hakam is the most remarkable Shiite whom were frequently accused of corporalism by authors of books dealing with the Islamic sects. Any historian can not notice any signal or pace of such accuse during investigating the life accounts of such accused persons. Finally, it shall be discovered that the main and only reason beyond charging such accusation is nothing other than those persons’ die-hard in defending the Ahlul­ Bayt sect and its imams.

By ensuing history of the man, it is obvious that Husham Bin Al­Hakam was the best arguer in the reign of Harun Ar­Rashid. He was evaded by the master Jews, Christians, Magi and atheists. This man did challenge and overcome all these categories. He also subdued Amr Bin Ubeid, Abu Hutheil Al­Allaf and their Mutazilite and Asharite likes.

While the caliph, Harun, was hiding behind a screen for listening, Jafar Al­Barmeki was holding sessions of disputation between followers of the different religions and sects. Husham was the most remarkable and famous in such sessions for his éclat and deduction. Some of his argumentation on masters of other religions are recorded.

Because of antagonism against the Prophet’s progeny, Ar­Rashid’s vizier could use his Magian shrewdness for provoking Husham on defending Imamate during one of these session. Hence, the caliph aimed at killing him. But he could escape. Till his death, he attempted at evading the caliph and his authorities.

In his Muroujut­Theheb, Al­Masudi refers to this incident.

On page 379 part 3, he writes:

Yahya Bin Khalid held sessions at which theologians, whether Muslims or of other religions, used to debate in their beliefs. Yahya said to them, “You have overstated about denial and materialization of the divine attributes… Is imamate mandated by the Lord or is it submitted to people’s own opinions? …etc.

We are to mention Sharif Al­Murteda’s defending Husham before we move to rending models of that man’s disputation that are acceptably sufficient to prove his innocence from charges recorded in books of the Islamic sects. Sharif Al­Murteda’s Ashafi, page 83:

As much as it is conceivable, Husham’s saying, “He is a corporeality unlike ordinary corporealities”, is the main incentive beyond accusation of his adopting for corporalism. Indisputably, the fore cited statement does by no means refer to anthropomorphizing, repeal a principal nor does it deny a branch. It is a statement of a rhetorical question. Majority of our acquaintances assert that this statement was within a longer one Husham addressed at the Mutazilite who had claimed the Anterior Lord’s being a thing unlike ordinary things.

The whole statement is, “Supposing your claiming the Anterior Lord’s being a thing unlike ordinary things, you should say then He is a corporeality unlike ordinary corporealities.” It is not necessary that opinions used in refuting a belief, are actually adopted by the refuter. It is so applicable that Husham might aimed at discerning their answer, or showing their inadequacy to introduce an answer for such a claim. Many other probabilities can be regarded in this topic.

Reports relating Husham’s regarding the faith that Allah is a corporeality that enjoys the entire qualities of ordinary corporealities, and his narrating the hadith of the Lord’s measures, are exclusively arisen by Al­Jahiz who relates them to An­Naddam. The latest is a doubtful narrator whose accounts are untrue.

Generally, faiths should be taken from embracers, masters and trustful reporters. It is impracticable to refer to claims of the rivals since this will make the matter worse and more calamitous. Thus, reports and documentations will not be trusted, especially in fields of providing faiths of a sect.

If Husham was actually bearing faith of corporalism, this would have been common and well known. For instance, faiths of Al­Khawarzmi and his followers are well known.

Imam As­Sadiq addressed at Husham, “As long as you, Husham, defend us, you shall be backed by the Sacred Spirit.” He also addressed at Husham, the young, when he preceded and sit him next to his place, while master Shias were attendant there, “This is our supporter, by the heart, the hand and the tongue.” Imam As­Sadiq also said, “Husham Bin Al­Hakam is the pioneer of our rights, and our spokesman. He is advocating our truthfulness and defending nullity of our antagonists.

He that follows him and his affair, shall be following us. And he whoever opposes and denies him, shall be opposing and denying us.” Finally, the imam was used to guiding and urging people on referring to Husham in questions of arguing the opponents. These are adequate proofs on wrongfulness and nothingness of the previous claims against Husham. Hence, it is nonsense to perceive that Husham might have said that his lord is seven arms length.

Moreover, it is most surely that such claims against Husham are seen as reviling at Imam As­Sadiq (peace be upon him) and ascribing him as bearing the same faiths, since the imam, as we have previously introduced, did praise and support Husham. Thus, Imam As­Sadiq should have denied, banished and censured Husham for bearing such horribly forlorn faiths if only that had been pure. Husham’s book regarding contingence of the cosmos is also forged against him. We have not seen such a book. We also have not had a written document or an authentic report asserting so.

In his Al­Milelu Wen­Nihel, part 1 page 185, Ashehristani records:

Husham Bin Al­Hakam is a deep scholar in questions of principals of the religion. It is impractical to scorn his decisive disputation against Mutazilites. As a matter of fact, this man is more excellent than his disputation and more exalted than anthropomorphism ascribed to him. He overcame Al­Allaf when he stated, “You claim of Allah’s being knowing by His knowledge, and his knowledge is His Essence. Thus, He should share the contingent beings in being knowing by a knowledge, and He should oppose them in His knowledge being His Essence. Then, why do you not claim the Lord’s being a corporeality unlike the corporealities, a feature unlike features and a component unlike the components?”

Just after describing Husham in such an admirable way, Ashehristani claims Husham’s claiming Ali’s godhood! This is really strange! Finally, Husham is nobler than claiming such a faith. It is also really strange that a Wahabist researcher reviles at Husham for his uttering that Allah is a corporeality unlike ordinary corporealities, when this is the faith of Wahabism indeed! Bin Baz and Ibn Teimiya, as it has been previously introduced, did evade the idea of denying God’s being a corporeality. Hence, Wahabists should have claimed Husham Bin Al­Hakam’s being one of them, because of his previous saying! Nevertheless, readers shall soon give credence to Husham’s being released from such faiths of anthropomorphism and God’s occupying a certain space.


Uyounul Akhbar, part 2 page 153:

Al­Mubith: O Husham! There is a thing around the cosmos, isn’t it?

Husham: No, it is not.

Al­Mubith: Nothing shall stop my hand if I send it out of this cosmos, then.

Husham: Nothing shall stop it, and there is nothing you shall send your hand to.

Al­Mubith: How should I recognize such a thing?

Husham: O Mubith! Supposing you and I were on the edges of the cosmos. I will claim of seeing nothing. You will ask me why. I will answer here is no gloomy intercepts me from seeing. Then, it is your turn to claim of seeing nothing. I will ask you why. You will answer there is no light to look at. In that case, will the two ­light and gloomy­ be equal in contradiction?

Al­Mubith: Yes, they will.

Al­Mubith: If they are equal in contradiction, why will they not be equal in nothingness?

Hence, Al­Mubith submitted.

On another day Husham asked Al­Mubith: Are they ­light and gloomy­ of the same power?

Al­Mubith: Yes, they are.

Husham: Are they of the same particles?

(Saying to himself aloud) Al­Mubith: If I say they are of the same particles they shall be of the same characteristics. And if I say they are not, they shall be contracted in wills and deeds.

Husham: Why do you not submit to Islam, then?

Al­Mubith: Far is that!


As­Saduq’s At­Tawhid, page 270:

My father: Ahmed Bin Idris and Mohammed Bin Yahya Al­Attar: Mohammed Bin Ahmed: Ibrahim Bin Husham: Mohammed Bin Hemmad: Al­Hassan Bin Ibrahim: Younus Bin Ibrahim:

For seventy years, a catholic named ‘Bureiha’ challenged Muslims. He used to challenge the arguers by providing knowledge of the Christ with his qualities, miracles and portents. None could challenge him in this field; therefore, Bureiha’s reputation was highly considered by Christians, Muslims, Jews and Magianists. Christians were very proud of their man. They used to say, “Even if Christianity had Bureiha alone, he would be satisfactory.” Nevertheless, Bureiha was continuing on seeking the most righteous path to take. He was inclined to Islam. In private, Bureiha used to inform a woman, who served and accompanied him for ages, of failing of the Christian’s proofs.

Bureiha toured all over countries challenging people in their faiths. He discussed the entire sects of Islam. He was always the prevalent. “You would have had a little of right if your masters had been the right.”, Bureiha was wont to address at the defeated sects. He, however, used to argue the most knowledgeable, pious and cognizant scholars. Finally, he was told of Shism. Some picked up Husham Bin Al­Hakam as the spokesman of Shias.

Husham was in his shop encircled by students of Quran when a big crowd of Christians associated by about one hundred monks in black, putting caps. The master was Bureiha, the grand Catholic. They encompassed his shop. A chair was prepared for the grand Catholic while the capped priests and monks were inclining against their canes. “Saving you, no other theologist could escape my challenge and prevalence in arguing about Christianity.

Today, I am to argue with you about Islam,” spoke Bureiha. Husham smiled, “O Bureiha! Do you want me to show you miracles as those shown by the Messiah? I am not the Messiah, and I will never attain his resemblance or approach him in any way. He is a perfect, excellent and elevated spirit. His miracles are obvious, and his portents are efficacious.” Later on, Bureiha confessed that he had been admired by Husham’s words.

“This is the proper place of argumentation,” Husham suggested.

Hence, Bureiha asked: well, what is the lineage linking your prophet to the Messiah.

Husham: He is the cousin of his maternal grandfather. The Messiah is the offspring of Isaac, while Mohammed is the offspring of Ishmael.

Bureiha: How could you limit his father’s lineage?

Husham: I can tell you of the lineage we regard, and I can tell of that you regard.

“I will overcome if he regards the lineage we believe in,” Bureiha said to himself.

Bureiha: Well, mention the lineage we regard.

Husham: You claim of his being anterior, and a part of an anterior. Then, who is the father and who is the son?

Bureiha: The son is that who descended to the earth.

Husham: No, the father is that who descended to the earth.

Bureiha: The son is the messenger of the father.

Husham: The father is wiser than the son, since he is the creator.

Bureiha: Creation is the father’s and the son’s.

Husham: Supposing they have been associates in creation, what for, then, did they not descend together?

Bureiha: How should they associate in a matter when they are the identical thing? They only differ in names.

Husham: They only similar in names.

Bureiha: This is nonsense.

Husham: This is reality.

Bureiha: The son is connected to the father.

Husham: The son is disconnected to the father.

Bureiha: This is contradictory to people’s faith.

Husham: Providing people’s faith is taken in consideration, you are defeated, then. People do believed that the father had been in being a long while before the son came to existence.

Bureiha: I do not mean this.

Husham: What for, then, have you provided people’s faith as your evidence while you reject it on yourself?

Bureiha: The father and the sons are only names of the Anterior.

Husham: Are these two names as anterior as the father and the son?

Bureiha: No, names are contingent.

Husham: Well, you have substituted the father for the son, and the son for the father. If the son, not the father, is the maker of these names, he will be the father. If the father, not the son, is the maker of these names, he will be the father, and there will be no son, since the son is the father.

Bureiha: The son is the name of the spirit when descended to the earth.

Husham: Supposing the spirit did not descend to the earth, what should the name be then?

Bureiha: The name is ‘the son’, whether the spirit descended or not.

Husham: Then, this spirit had two different names before descending to the earth?

Bureiha: All is the identical. It is only one spirit.

Husham: You divided that spirit into two parts; the son and the father.

Bureiha: No, name of the father and name of the son is the same.

Husham: Then, the son should be the father of the father, and the father should be the father of the son. And the son is the same.

“Well, you have never encountered such an embarrassing day. You should leave,” the attendant monks advised their master.

For a while, Bureiha was perplexed. As he tried to leave, Husham seized him and asked, “What occludes you from embracing Islam? Is there any other question regarding Islam you doubt? You’d Better say it, otherwise I will provide a single question about Christianity, and till next morning, you will be trying to find its answer. The next morning you will be lead straightly to me.” “Do not avoid this question. It may be the way to overcoming,” the monks suggested. “Well, what is it, man of wisdom?” Bureiha asked.

Husham: You see that the son knows completely what the father has, do you not?

Bureiha: Yes, indeed.

Husham: You see that the father knows completely what the son had, do you not?

Bureiha: Yes, indeed.

Husham: You see that the son is competent to bear whatsoever the father bears, do you not?

Bureiha: Yes, indeed.

Husham: You do see that the father is competent to bear whatsoever the son bears, do you not?

Bureiha: Yes, indeed.

Husham: Then, how is it acceptable that one of them is the son of the other while both are enjoying the identical competencies? Similarly, how should one wrong the other?

Bureiha: They both have no injustice at all.

Husham: If so, it is just that the son should be the father of the father, and the father should be the son of the son. Think of it, Bureiha! Hence, the Christians went back damning the time at which they saw Husham and his acquaintances.

Bureiha’s maid asked him an explanation for the depression he had. He told her of his situation with Husham. “Woe is you! Do you intend to support the right or the wrong?”, she asked. “The right, of course,” Bureiha answered. “Then, you should turn to the right whenever it was. Beware disputation. Disputation is doubt. Doubt is evil. People of evil shall be in hell,” she advised.

Bureiha opted for her saying and decided to see Husham again.

Next morning, Husham was alone when Bureiha came to him and asked, “O Husham! Is there a definite person whose sayings you revere and refer to and obey?”

Husham: Yes, Bureiha!

Bureiha: What are his specifications?

Husham: The racial or the religious?

Bureiha: Both.

Husham: Regarding the racial, he is the head of the Arab, the choice of Quraish, the select of Hashemites. He is, lineally, the most favorable. Quraish is the best of the Arab. Hashemites are the best of Quraish. The best of Hashemites is their celebrity, chief and master. Sons of the master are preferred to others. He is the son of the master.

Bureiha: What about his religion?

Husham: The jurisprudence or the material qualities?

Bureiha: The material qualities.

Husham: He is so sinless that he does never defies, and so generous that he is never niggardly, and so courageous that he is never coward, and so intelligent that he does never omit any of the knowledge he receives. He is the observant of what is imposed on him, the descendant of the prophets’ progeny and the compiler of the prophets’ knowledge. He possesses himself when enraged, and gives the due and supports when satisfied. He acts fairly to the adherent and the antagonist. He does never outdo with his opponents. He does never block advantage of his advocate, and acts as exactly as the Divine Book instructs, and makes miracle things. He is one of people of purity. He relates sayings of the immaculate imams. None could ever repeal his argumentation. He did never ignore a question. He adjudges in every field, and clears every blackness.

Bureiha: You have just counted peculiarities of the Messiah, and remarked his evidences and marvels. Yet, personality is different from qualities, and description depends upon the described. We will believe if the descriptions are found in the described.

Husham: You shall certainly be guided if you believe, and you shall never be censured if you follow the right. O Bureiha! The entire argumentations God has instituted upon the earlier, are the same instituted upon the middle and the late. Hence, argumentations, faiths and beliefs shall never be elapsing.

Bureiha: This is very alike to the right, and very near to the truth. It is indeed the quality of the wise who verify the true argumentation in a way repealing the heresy.

Husham: Yes, indeed.

Later on, Husham, Bureiha and his bond began their journey to Al­Madina for meeting Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him). First, they met Musa Bin Jafar (peace be upon him) before whom Husham related the whole story. Subsequently, imam Musa Bin Jafar asked, “O Bureiha! How about your knowledge of your Book?”

Bureiha: I am surely knowledgeable in this regard.

Imam: How about its interpretation.

Bureiha: I am the most trustful in interpretation of the Book.

Hence, imam Musa Bin Jafar went on reciting the Bible. “The Messiah was reciting in this very way. None else did recite. You are the very man I have been looking for fifty years.”

Bureiha and his maid embraced Islam in a distinguishable way.

Husham, Bureiha and the maid saw Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him) afterwards. As Husham related the story of Bureiha and his conversation with Musa (peace be upon him), imam recited God’s saying, (Offspring, one of the other, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing). “How have you, the sacrificed, obtained the Torah, the Bible and the prophets’ books?”, Bureiha asked. “We have them in inheritance. We recite and utter them as the prophets recited and uttered. Allah does never elect a representative who should say, ‘I do not know’ about any question.”

Bureiha adhered to Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him) and to his son, Musa (peace be upon him) till his death. Imam Musa Bin Jafar performed the ritual bathing, coffining and burying of Bureiha, and said, “This is among the Disciples of the Messiah. He does respect God’s rights.” Most of Bureiha’s acquaintances hoped had they been like him.


Alihtijaj, part 2 page 69:

Husham Bin Al­Hakam: A miscreant asked Abu Abdillah about the on existence of the Creator of the cosmos. Abu Abdillah: The evidence is the actuality of deeds referring to efforts of the maker. Whenever a constructive building is seen, it is directly understood that there should be an expert constructor who did so. Yet, this constructor is not met.
The miscreant: What is that Creator, then?

Abu Abdillah: He is a thing incompatible to things. I only used ‘thing’ for referring to him. He is a thing only by His objective being. He is neither a corporeality nor a feature. He is neither materialized nor measured. He is not comprehended by the five senses. Allusions cannot apprehend Him. Ages cannot degrade Him. Time cannot effect Him.

The miscreant: Every alluded is inevitably created.

Abu Abdillah: If this is true, we shall not be submitted to monotheism. We are not mandated to believe in a being that is not alluded. We say that anthropomorphized beings that are alluded, comprehended and conceived by senses must have been inevitably created. It is essential to substantiate that the Maker of things must have been out of the two unacceptable articles. First, article of denial that, particularly, stands for nullity and nonexistence. Second, article of anthropomorphizing the creatures that are evidently structured. Consequently, it is essential to affirm existence of the maker due to existence of the made, and their being made exhibits their indigence for the maker. This results in proving that the maker is not like the made. Specifications of the made, such as their extrinsic structure and composition, their being after nonexistence and their changeability in size, color and strength, do assert their want to their Maker.

The miscreant: As you have proved His existence, you have demarcated Him.

Abu Abdillah: I have not demarcated. I only prove His existence when there is nothing stands between proving and denial.

The miscreant: What about His saying, (The Beneficent settled on the Throne)? Abu Abdillah: He characterizes Himself by this expression. He is prevalent over the Throne and abstracted from His creatures. The Throne is not a place dedicated to Him. We believe that He is the bearer and the holder of the Throne. We repeat His statement, (His Chair is as large as the heavens and the earth.) Hence, we prove existence of the Throne and the Chair, but We do deny that the Throne and the Chair are containing Him. We also deny that the Lord, the Powerful and Glorified, is in need for a space or any created thing. We do affirm that His creatures are in need of Him.

The miscreant: What is the difference, then, between raising or lowering the hands towards the heavens or the earth?

Abu Abdillah: There is no difference according to the Lord’s knowledge, comprehension and competence. However, He, the Powerful the Glorified, ordered his devotees and servants of raising their hands upward, towards the Heavens since He made it source of subsistence. Hence, we do affirm what is affirmed by the Quran and the Prophet who says, “Raise your hands to Allah, the Powerful the Glorified.” This fact is unanimously agreed upon by the entire sects of Muslims.

The miscreant: Is it practicable that there are more than one creator for this cosmos?

Abu Abdillah: If there were two creators, they, both, should be either anterior and powerful, or both be weak, or one should be weak while the other powerful. Regarding the earliest probability, what for do they not challenge on having the godhead singularly? If one is powerful and the other is not, then it is provable that there is one creator, since the other is weak.

Furthermore, if there were two creators, they should be accordant in definite, not all, matters. As we notice this orderly creation and current planets and consequence of night, day, sun and moon; these all referred to ultimate coincidence of affairs of creation. Finally, this shows that the Maker if One.

Husham Bin Al­Hakam:

As Abul-Awja was before Imam As­Sadiq (peace be upon him), he was asked, “O Abul­Awja! Are you made or not?

Abul­Awja: No, I am not made.
Imam As­Sadiq: How should your figures be if you were made?

As he could not find an answer, Abul­Awja went out.

Husham Bin Al­Hakam:

Abu Shakir Ad­Deisani, the miscreant, addressed at Abu Abdillah, “O Jafar Bin Mohammed! Lead me to my god.” There was a child having an egg in the hand. Abu Abdillah asked the child to give him that egg. Then, he commented, “O Deisani! In my hand is a covert fortress with a packed crust. Under this crust, there is another one, but lank. A liquid golden yellow and a dissolved silvern are under that lank crust. Neither the liquid golden yellow fuses with the dissolved silvern, nor does the dissolved silvern coalesce the liquid golden yellow. Hence, each is on its manner. No sound thing can go into it to tell of its soundness, and no rotten thing can go there to tell of its putridity. It is unknown whether it was created for the male or the female. It bursts colors like these of a peacock. Do you see there must have been a maker of such a thing?”

The man nodded his head for a considerable time before he declared, “I admit there is no god but Allah, lonelily without any associate, and I do admit Mohammed is His servant and apostle, and you are the imam and God’s argumentation on His creatures. I do declare my repentance…”

Husham Bin Al-Hakam:

An Egyptian miscreant decided to see Abu Abdillah (peace be upon him) for disputation since he had heard of his knowledgeability. As he could not meet the imam in Al­Madina, he continued his way to Mecca. We were with the Imam when that Egyptian miscreant met him during the time of the ritual Circumambulation. After greeting, Abu Abdillah asked about his name.

The miscreant: Abdul Melik (servant of the king).

The imam: What is your nickname?

The Miscreant: Abu Abdillah (father of the slave of God).

The imam: Who is that (king) you are serving, is he a mundane or a heavenly king? What about your son? Is he a slave of a mundane or a heavenly god?

The miscreant could not find an answer.

The Imam: You should answer.

The miscreant kept up his silence.

The imam: You may see me after accomplishing this Circumambulation.

We were attendant when the miscreant came to Abu Abdillah.

The Imam: You know there is something beneath the earth and there is something above it, do you not ?

The miscreant: Yes, I do.

The imam: Have you gone beneath it?

The miscreant: No, I have not.

The imam: Can you realize what is there?

The miscreant: I cannot. But I surmise there is nothing there?

The imam: Surmise is deficiency unless it is ascertained. Have you been in the heavens?

The miscreant: No, I have not.

The imam: Can you realize what is there?

The miscreant: No, I cannot.

The imam: Have you seen what is beyond the east and the west?

The miscreant: No, I have not.

The imam: What a strange man you are! You have not attained the furthest east or west, and you have not descended under the earth, and you have not ascended to the heavens to know what creatures there are, and, meanwhile, you deny all! Is it practicable for the sane to deny what they ignore? The miscreant: indeed, none addressed such wording at me.

The imam: Hence, you doubt so. Maybe yes, maybe not.

The miscreant: Maybe!

The imam: O man! The ignorant have no argumentation on the knowing. Similarly, the illiterate have no argumentation on the literate. O you Egyptian brother! Try to understand me. Do you not see the sun, the moon, the day and the night come one into the other without difference in disposition? Do you not see them go and return orderly. They are bound. They lack any other place to go in. If they were able to go, why would they be returning. If they were not bound, what for would they not interchange their roles or places. They are, by God, bound. O Egyptian brother! You believe it is the nemesis which arranges all these things. Then, what for is it incompetent to stop what is going on or release what is bound? See how the heavens is uplifted, and the earth is ballast. The heavens should never fall on the earth, and the earth should never incline on what is beneath. By God, it is the Creator the Maker who holds them.

(Husham:) Hence, that miscreant believed and succumbed to the imam who order me of instructing that man. Alihtijaj, part 2 page 142:

Husham Bin Al­Hakam: Ibnu Abil­Awja, Abu Shakir Ad­Deisani, Abdul­Melik Al­Basri and Ibnul­Muqaffa met at the Holy House of God for mocking the pilgrims and reviling at the Holy Quran. Ibn Abil­Awja suggested that each should find faultfinding in a quarter of the Holy Quran so that, the next year, they should repeal the Quran entirely. They agreed upon meeting in the same place. They assured that faultfinding of the Quran should result in repealing Mohammed’s prophecy which leads to nullity of Islam. This would prove those four person’s being the right.

The next year, they met in the same place. Ibn Abul­Awja confessed, “Since our last meeting, I have been thinking of the Verse, (Then when they despaired of him, they retired, conferring privately together. 12:80) I could not find any fault in the rhetoric and meaningfulness of this Verse; therefore I could not see another Verse.”

Abdul­Melik spoke, “Since our last meeting, I have been thinking of the Verse, (O people! A parable is set forth, therefore listen to it; surely those whom you call upon besides Allah cannot create a fly, though they should all gather for it, and should the fly snatch away anything form them, they could not take it back for it; weak are the invoker and the invoked. 22:73) I could not say anything about this Verse.” Abu Shakir spoke, “Since our last meeting, I have been thinking of God’s saying, (If there had been in them any gods except Allah, they would both have certainly been in a state of disorder. 21:22) I could not say anything about this Verse.”

Ibnul­Muqaffa spoke, “Since our last meeting, I have been thinking of God’s saying, (And it was said: O earth! Swallow down your water, and O cloud! Clear away. And the water was made to abate and the affair was decided, and the ark rested on the Judi, and it was said: Away with the unjust people. 11:44) I could neither conceive it, nor could I say anything about it.”

Meanwhile, Jafar Bin Mohammed As­Sadiq passed by them and recited God’s saying, (Say: if men and jinn should combine together to bring the like of this Quran, they could not bring the like of it, though some of them were aiders of others. 17:88)

They looked at each other and confessed, “If Islam is an actuality, Mohammed’s succession shall be in the hands of none other than Jafar Bin Mohammed. We have never seen such a person. We revere him whenever we see. Besides, we feel embarrassed when we meet him” Hence, they escaped after they had declared their submission.


Alihtijaj, part 2 page 126: Husham Bin Al-Hakam: I was greatly touched when I received the news of Amr Bin Ubeid’s opinions and his holding sessions in Basra Mosque. Hence I went there.

It was Friday when I arrived in Basra and went directly to the Mosque. A great number of people were encircling Amr who was in a black garment, in the twist, and another on the shoulders. People were referring to him in their questions. I could push my way through them till I had a seat rather near. I knelt and asked, “O master! I am a foreigner. May I ask you a question?”

Yes, you may.

Do you have eyes?

O son! What sort of question is this?

Well, this is my question.

Although it is an idiot question, I am to answer.

Well, you will answer me?

Ask, then.

Do you have an eye?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I can distinguish colors and person with it.

Do you have a nose?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I smell with it.

Do you have a tongue?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I use it in articulation.

Do you have an ear?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I hear sounds with it.

Do you have hands?

Yes, I do.

What is their function?

I use them for seizing things, and discerning the flimsy from the dense.

Do you have legs?

Yes, I do.

What is their function?

I use them for moving from a place to another.

Do you have a mouth?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I taste the different drinks and food.

Do you have a heart?

Yes, I do.

What is its function?

I use it for sensing whatsoever comes to the other organs.

What for should this occur while the other organs are sound and cogent?

O son! If the other senses or organs doubt anything, they will refer to the heart for noticing. Function of the heart, then, is asserting the true and eradicating the doubted.

This means that God made the heart for guiding the other organs to the true, does it not?

Yes, it does.

This means that the heart is inevitably necessary for eradicating doubts of the other organs, does it not?

Yes, it does.

O Abu Marwan! God, the Blessed the Exalted, did not leave your organs before He selected a leader whose mission is affirming the true and denying the doubted. How is it practicable for Him to leave all these beings subsisting in their perplexity, suspicion and discrepancy, without selecting for them a leader to whom they should refer in states of suspicion and perplexity, like He had done when He selected a leader to whom the other organs should refer in states of doubt and perplexity?

For a considerable while, Amr could not find an answer. He, then, glanced at me and asked, “You are Husham, are you not?” “No, I am not,” I answered. “You are one of his disciples, are you not?” he asked. “No, I am not,” I answered. “Where are you from, then?” he re asked. “From Kufa,” I answered. “It is indeed you, Husham.” He asserted and embraced me. He sat me next to him without uttering a single letter till I left.



more post like this