The Myth of The Bay’ah of Ghadir

BY EBN HUSSEIN (Shia convert to Islam/Sunnah)

The Greatest Bay’ahs of Islam VS The Myth of The Bay’ah of Ghadir

The greatest of all pledges of allegiance (bay’ah) is that of the Sahabah to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) which is clearly and unambiguously mentioned in the Quran and thus even the Sahabah abusers and haters have no choice but to recite it if they really believe in the book of Allah.

The Bay’ah al-Shajarah/al-Ridwan (The Pledge of the Tree (Arabic: بيعة الشجرة‎ / بيعة الرضوان) is the historical event in which the Prophet (ﷺ) gathered around 1,400 of his noble companions (including bis Ahlul-Bayt) and called them to pledge to fight until death and avenge (yes, that was the love of the Prophet for his Sahabah) the death of his beloved companion, Uthman b. ‘Affan (may Allah be pleased with him), who was mistakenly believed to be killed by the polytheists at that time.

This pledge took place under a tree and was thus known as the Pledge of the Tree and was recorded in the final scripture revealed to mankind:

لَّقَدْ رَضىِ‏َ اللَّهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُونَكَ تحَْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ فَعَلِمَ مَا فىِ قُلُوبهِِمْ فَأَنزَلَ السَّكِينَةَ عَلَيهم وَ أَثَابَهُمْ فَتْحًا قَرِيبًا

{Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquillity upon them and rewarded them with an imminent conquest.} [The noble Qur’an, 48:18]

In fact, even the bay’ah of the female Sahabah is clearly mentioned in the Qur’an:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِذَا جَاءَكَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتُ يُبَايِعْنَكَ عَلَىٰ أَن لَّا يُشْرِكْنَ بِاللَّهِ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَسْرِقْنَ وَلَا يَزْنِينَ وَلَا يَقْتُلْنَ أَوْلَادَهُنَّ وَلَا يَأْتِينَ بِبُهْتَانٍ يَفْتَرِينَهُ بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِنَّ وَأَرْجُلِهِنَّ وَلَا يَعْصِينَكَ فِي مَعْرُوفٍ فَبَايِعْهُنَّ وَاسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُنَّ اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ

{O Prophet, when the believing women come to you pledging to you that they will not associate anything with Allah, nor will they steal, nor will they commit unlawful sexual intercourse, nor will they kill their children, nor will they bring forth a slander they have invented between their arms and legs, nor will they disobey you in what is right – then accept their pledge and ask forgiveness for them of Allah. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. [The noble Qur’an, 60:12]

Mind you, according to Twelver Shi’ism the bulk of the Sahabah are nothing but apostate disbelievers and heretics who somehow gave their lives for the spread of Islam and Tawhid but at the same time neglected the so-called pillar of all pillars of Islam (which is the khurafah of Wilayah and Imamah i.e. the divine leadership of ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) and his descendants from a Persian Zoroastrian princess). A belief that was never endorsed by ‘Ali b. Abi Talib who not once in his life claimed to be infallible (let alone being a divinely chosen leader).

Now, what about the so-called pledge of Ghadir Khumm? After all, the entire Twelver Shia sect is based upon this event; they have turned the pond (Ghadir) of Khum into the essence of the religion of Islam, and they even name their projects after this incident (but they even fail at that):

The semi-literate BAG anti-Sunni/Sahabah channel and its members can’t even pronounce their own channel name. Their ignorant leader ‘Syed’ Ali Imam says “Bayt Al Ghadeer” which means ‘the house of Ghadeer’. It is Bay’ah (or Bay’at) – بيعة – and not Bayt (house). ‘Bayat’ means ‘hibernation’ *facepalm*

The Imamites claim that Islam was completed with the pledge of allegiance to the Prophet’s (ﷺ) cousin. Twenty-three years of da’wah and struggle by the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) were only completed with the divine leadership of his cousin and by extension his descendants from a Persian princess (Persian-Zoroastrian nepotism disguised as ‘the school of Ahl-E-Beit’).

Of course, there is not a single word about this alleged superior pledge of allegiance in the book of Allah. Imagine, the alleged most crucial of all pledges in the history of mankind, the so-called pledge of Ghadir, the pledge upon which the alleged salvation of mankind rests, yet it is nowhere mentioned in the Qur’an.

True, not everything is mentioned in the Qur’an. Not all Prophets are mentioned, however, over 20 of them have been clearly mentioned (with details of their life) and favoured upon mankind.

True, the likes of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, (and Ali and his descendants), etc., are not clearly mentioned in the Qur’an, but this is fine to Ahl al-Sunnah, as none of them are divinely chosen guides and the essence of the religion. They don’t need to be clearly mentioned in the Qur’an in the first place and they haven’t (thus why the Rafidi clerics throughout history have either resorted to the claim that the Qur’an has been corrupted by the Sahabah or that batini/esoteric ‘tafsir’ i.e. distortions, mental gymnastics, and decontextualisation of Qur’anic verses need to be applied to somehow prove the pillar of Twelver Imamism).

So where is the so-called pledge of Ghadir in the Qur’an? Allah (subhanah) certainly tests us, but he doesn’t confuse us, and the proof is that all the foundations of the religion are clearly mentioned in the Qur’an. As a matter of fact, and as already mentioned, pledges of allegiance that according to Imamism are of much less significance are clearly mentioned in the Qur’an, however, no word about any pledge at Ghadir can be found in the Qur’an.

What person of intellect can accept that the most important pledge of allegiance in the history of mankind was somehow not mentioned in the Qur’an whilst at the same time the Creator of the Universe, Allah the Exalted, spoke about the so-called apostate and treacherous Sahabahand revealed verses about their honourable pledge to the Messenger of Allah (which was also in defense of ‘Uthman!)

Is this the justice (‘adl) and sound intellect (‘aql), that the Twelvers always brag about? Indeed, it is as flawed as The failed and impractical Shia concept of divine Grace (Lutf) and Imamah.

Needless to say that no learned Sunni denies the event of Ghadir Khumm. However, as with everything else related to Ali b. Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him), the Shia distort this incident and make claims that ‘Ali b. Abi Talib himself never did.

For starters, there was never a pledge of allegiance at Ghadir, to begin with. Reports stating that ‘Umar b. al-Khattab congratulated ‘Ali are all weak, and even if authentic, they prove the love and admiration and respect ‘Umar had for his brother ‘Ali. There is nothing wrong in congratulating ‘Ali for being declared a mawla (which is much more than a friend, however, it has nothing to do with successorship, Ali himself never understood it the way the Rafidah understand it).

Our master ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was not merely declared as a ‘friend’ at Ghadir, this is a strawman argument whereby the enemies of Ahl al-Sunnah misconstrue the stance of Ahl al-Sunnah. The learned from amongst the Ahl al-Sunnah never make such silly claims and it would be indeed ridiculous to state that the Prophet (ﷺ) suddenly decided to tell everybody that ‘Ali is his friend. No, it wasn’t like that, the Shia masses have been fooled as they haven’t been told the full story.

The Ahl al-Sunnah believe that the event of Ghadir had a specific and nuanced context (which Shia clerics and propagandists often don’t even mention) that had nothing to do with a pledge of allegiance ceremony (a claim that can’t be proven with any authentic report).

In a nutshell: The conflict revolved around a slave girl that Ali took for himself. Ali justified it by stating that he had the right of determining what fell into his khums, which angered some of the companions, who wanted the slavegirl for themselves.

When the complaints reached the Prophet (ﷺ), he sided with Ali and pointed out that he is deserving of more than just a mere slave girl. He condemned them for holding grudges against him as well.

Ali finally arrives in Makkah to meet the Prophet (ﷺ) and around a week later, the Prophet (ﷺ) calls out to the people saying, “Whosoever I am his mawla then Ali is his mawla,” and this ultimately ends any bitterness that may have possibly remained in the hearts of those that got into conflict with Ali.

Of course, everybody already knew that ‘Ali is the cousin and friend of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), however, the Prophet (ﷺ) took the opportunity to convey that ‘Ali is not just merely a friend of his, but a mawla, someone that they should obey when they are asked to. A mawla is much more than a mere friend, just like a bosom friend is much more than a mere friend:

Ibn ‘Abbas reports: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) came out during his illness from which he died, his head bound with a cloth. He sat on the pulpit, thanked Allah, praised Him, and said: “There is no one among the people who has been more generous to me with his life and his property than Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Quhafa and if I was to take a bosom friend (khalil), I would take Abu Bakr as my bosom friend. But the friendship of Islam is better. Block off every door in this Masjid except the door of Abu Bakr. [Sahih Bukhari]

If it wasn’t for his friendship with Allah, it would have been Abu Bakr (not ‘Ali) as his closest friend, his bosom friend. Mind you, the Prophet (ﷺ) uttered these words towards the end of his life (instead of warning against Abu Bakr as the Shia do, he expressed his love for him!).

Abu Bakr entered upon the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) after his death. He ‎put his mouth between his eyes, put his hands on his temples, and said: “O my Prophet, O my ‎close friend, O my bosom friend.” [Musnad Imam Ahmad, hadith hasan]

So the term mawla —just like the term khalil— means much more than just friend, however, both of these terms are not used for declaration of successorship, and most importantly, authentic reports from ‘Ali b. Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) himself and his descendants prove that they never had the Twelver Shia understanding of what occurred at Ghadir Khumm, nor did they ever use it to prove their alleged divine right to rule over the Ummah. Their understanding was a balanced one, it was that of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah who have not turned the bay’ah of the Sahabah (that is actually mentioned in the Qur’an) into a main pillar of the religion.

For more information about the true Ah al-Bayt/Sunni understanding of the hadith of Ghadir Khumm I advise you to study: