Continued from last post:
It is true that in the view of Ibn Umar, political power is the determinant of Imamate! Muslim records:
It has been reported on the authority of Nafi, that ‘Abdullah b. Umar paid a visit to Abdullah b. Muti’ in the days (when atrocities were perpetrated on the people of Medina) at Harra in the time of Yazid b. Mu’awiya. Ibn Muti’ said: Place a pillow for Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman (family name of ‘Abdullah b. Umar). But the latter said: I have not come to visit with you. I have come to you to tell you a tradition I heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). I heard him say: One who withdraws his hand from obedience (to the Amir) will find no argument (in hid defence) when he stands before Allah on the Day of Judgment, and one who dies without having bound himself by an oath of allegiance (to an Amir) will die the death of one belonging to the days Jahiliyya. [Sahih Muslim, Book 20, Number 4562]
Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi in his Minhaj al-Sunnah, vol. 1, p. 110 comments on this Hadith in this manner:
وهذا حدَّثَ به عبد الله بن عمر لعبد الله بن مطيع بن الأسود لمّا خلعوا طاعة أمير وقتهم يزيد ، مع أنه كان فيه من الظلم ما كان ، ثم إنه اقتتل هو وهم ، وفعل بأهل الحرة أموراً منكرة
فعـُلِمَ أن هذا الحديث دلَّ على ما دلَّ عليه سائر الأحاديث الآتية من أنه لا يخرج على ولاة أمور المسلمين بالسيف . وأن من لم يكن مطيعا لولاة الأمور مات ميتة جاهلية
This is what Abdullah ibn Umar did to Abdullah ibn Muti’ ibn al-Aswad when he withdrew from obedience to the Amir of their time, Yazid, despite that he was an oppressor and committed atrocities against the people of Harra.
It is known that this Hadith is proof for what the other Hadiths prove, that it is not permissible to rise with the sword against the rulers of the Muslims. And whosoever does not obey the rulers dies the death of Jahiliyyah.
In other words, in the real views of Ibn Taymiyyah al-Nasibi, both Sayyidah Fatima (عليها السلام) and Imam al-Husayn (عليه السلام) who fought with the sword against Yazid’s army, died the death of Jahiliyyah (naudhobillah)!
Of course, the fact that both are leaders of Paradise shows that both had given allegiance to the correct Imams of their times, and that Ibn Umar was wrong! It also shows that neither Abubakr nor Yazid was the rightful Imam of his time.
Shaykh al-Albani has recorded some Hadiths that help us out of the dilemma. He records in his Sahih al-Jami’ as-Saghir, Volume 1, page 482 (Al-Maktab al-Islami) that Zaid bin Thaabit (رضي الله عنه) said:
قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: إني تارك فيكم خليفتين: كتاب الله حبل ممدود ما بين السماء والأرض أو ما بين السماء إلى الأرض وعترتي أهل بيتي وأنهما لن يفترقا حتى يردا عليّ الحوض
Allaah’s Apostle, peace be upon him, said: I will always leave (taarikun) among you TWO SUCCESSORS: the Book of Allaah, which is a rope stretching between the heavens and the earth, AND my progeny, my Ahl al-Bayt. The two of them will never separate till they meet me at the Lake-Font.”
Commenting upon its authenticity, Shaykh al-Albani says:صحيح Sahih
Al-Haythami in his Majma’ al-Zawaid, Volume 9, page 162 (Daar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah) has also recorded the Hadeeth, with this comment:
رواه أحمد وإسناده جيد – Ahmad recorded it and its chain is good.
The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has claimed that he always has two successors among the Muslims. These successors never separate from each other. One of them is the Qur’an, while the other is the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) – a successor from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام). So, the determinant of Imamah is whether the Imam one is giving his allegiance to is from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام) who never separate from the Qur’an in their words or actions. No doubt, neither Abubakr nor Yazid was from this Ahl al-Bayt (عليهم السلام). Therefore, they were only fake caliphs.