By Rasul Jafarian

The ḥadīth of Ghadīr or the day of Ghadīr is a reference to an event that took place in 10^th hijri on the 18^th of Dhi al-Ḥijjah, near a location called Ghadīr Khumm. As historical reports transmit, the Messenger of Allah was returning to Medina after completing his Hajj Tamattu‘ and asked people to stop near this pond and described ‘Alī (a) as a Walī of the believers in his famous statement, “Man Kunto Mawla Fa-Hadhā ‘Alīyun Mawla” – ‘Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla.’ Thus, the narration and day of Ghadīr became rooted in this event.

Ghadīr Khumm is a well-known location, around 1 mile from Juḥfa – one of the mīqāt locations for pilgrims – that many classical geographers have alluded to. Yāqūt Ḥamawī in his Mu‘jam al-Buldān describes the location under the entry of Ghadīr Khumm. Yāqūt who had Nāṣibī and anti-Allid tendencies, says the Prophet (p) gave a sermon in Ghadīr but does not make any mention of what that sermon was about. Ya‘qūbī in 3^rd century hijri writes:

As for Juḥfa, there resides a small population from Banī Salīm, and Ghadīr Khumm is two miles from Juḥfa.

This location is well known until today and numerous papers have been written researching its precise location.

Ghadīr, Verse of Ikmāl and Tablīgh

As per what has been recorded in narrations and historical transmissions, the ḥadīth of Ghadīr, or more precisely, the ḥadīth of Wilāyat, is discussed in tandem with two verses of Surah Mā’idah – one of the last, if not the last, chapters revealed:

ٱلْيَوْمَ يَئِسَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ مِن دِينِكُمْ فَلَا تَخْشَوْهُمْ وَٱخْشَوْنِ ۚ ٱلْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِى وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ ٱلْإِسْلَـٰمَ دِينًا

[5:3] Today the disbelievers have given up all hope of ˹undermining˺ your faith. So do not fear them; fear Me! Today I have perfected your faith for you, completed My favour upon you, and chosen Islam as your way.

۞ يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ ۖ وَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِسَالَتَهُۥ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ ٱلنَّاسِ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى ٱلْقَوْمَ ٱلْكَـٰفِرِينَ

[5:67] O Messenger! Convey everything revealed to you from your Lord. If you do not, then you have not delivered His message. Allah will ˹certainly˺ protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the people who disbelieve.

The reason why classical and contemporary scholars derive a relationship from the prima-facie meaning of these two verses, with the ḥadīth of Wilāyat is that during this year and after this declaration – which Allah adamantly wants the Prophet (p) to convey – the religion is completed. Numerous sources show that these verses were revealed in the context of Ghadīr and in relation to the Imamate of ‘Alī (a). As per the Shī‘a, Wilāyat is one of the main pillars of religion, which alongside a political dimension, also has a spiritual and divine dimension.

This equals to the belief in the vicegerency of Imam ‘Alī (a) and his sons, and them being the proof of Allah (swt), the medium of grace and guidance. The Shī‘a as per this belief, take their religious teachings – after the Quran – from the narrations of the Imams (a), and do not accept teachings transmitted from other pathways. Although in this regard there are some trends that are moderate, while others are most extreme or are exaggerators (ghālī), that is outside the scope of our discussion. Interestingly, in some transmissions of the narration of Ghadīr, it is also said that the Prophet (p) mentioned the narration of Thaqalayn in his sermon.

Imamate is by Divine Explicit Designation and Ghadīr is the Most Important Evidence

It is imperative that I mention two points:

1) In the Quran, many of the Prophets (p) mentioned are father and son; such as Ibrāhīm and Ismā‘īl. Allah (swt) refers to this as

ذُرِّيَّةًۢ بَعْضُهَا مِنۢ بَعْضٍ

[3:34] They are descendants of one another.

I do not want to argue for the legitimacy of Imamate in one progeny through this verse, because the Quran’s main emphasis is on the piety of an individual, as Allah (swt) Himself informs Prophet (p) Ibrahim: [2:124] My covenant is not extended to the wrongdoers.

Nevertheless, in general, the notion of being a descendant is mentioned in the Quran. Therefore, besides the notion of descendants, the most important evidence for the Shī‘a for the divine explicit appointment for Imamate of ‘Alī (a) is the event of Ghadīr. It is for this reason that the event of Ghadīr has been given utmost attention.

2) Furthermore, the terms Imam and Walī in the Quran have been used in the meaning of leadership and authority. The word Khalīfa has also been used for humans in general and elsewhere Prophet Dawūd (a) is also addressed as a Khalīfa of Allah (swt) on earth. However, in the story of Ibrahim (a), the term Imam is used:

إِنِّى جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا

[2:124] I am appointing you as a leader for mankind.

Another verse:

إِنَّمَا وَلِيُّكُمُ ٱللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُۥ وَٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟

[5:55] Your only guardians are Allah, His Messenger, and fellow believers…

is also further evidence that the term walī is used in this meaning. It seems the word walī is most often used in the meaning of leadership and this is something that one must pay close attention to.

The Full Narration of Ghadīr

The text of the narration of Ghadīr has been transmitted in different ways and the most important phrase in it is definitely Man Kunto Mawla Fa-Hadhā ‘Alīyun Mawla, which has been recorded in numerous Sunnī and Shī‘ī works from the earliest days of recorded Islamic history. In classical ḥadīth works a lengthy and a more complete version of the event does exist. A lot of research has been done on this topic and the different versions of the report have been collected. In this brief paper, we will just reference one narration that Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal – one of the Imams of the Ahl al-Sunnah – records in his book Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba:

‘Abdullah narrated to us from his father, from ‘Affān, from Ḥammād b. Salamah, from ‘Alī b. Zayd from ‘Uday b. Thābit, from al-Barrā’ b. ‘Āzib, who said:

We were with the Messenger of Allah on a journey, and we stopped by Ghadīr Khumm. The call for the congregational prayer was made for us and the ground under two trees was swept for the Messenger of Allah, and he prayed Ẓuhr. Then he grabbed the hand of ‘Alī and said: Do you not know that I have more authority (awla) over the believers than themselves?

They replied: Yes.

He (p) said: Do you not know that I have more authority over all the believers than themselves?

They said: Yes.

Then he grabbed the hand of ‘Alī and said: O Allah, whosoever’s mawla I am, then ‘Alī (a) is also his mawla. O Allah, love the one who loves him, and hate the one who hates him.

‘Umar met him (‘Alī) after that and said: Congratulations to you O son of Abū Ṭālib. Today you have become the mawla of every male and female believer.¹

In this report, the crux of the event is mentioned, although the date of this event is not mentioned. The most important part of this narration is where the meaning of Wilāyat is explained as Awlawīyyat (more authority). Even the praise of ‘Umar is recorded in this report which is very significant. The reporter is al-Barrā’ b. ‘Āzib who was an Anṣārī companion and well-known and the book in which this narration is recorded is by Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 240) is one of the main scholars of the Sunnis, particularly the Ahl al-Ḥadīth. In other words, he is one of the staunchest Sunni scholars.

The Chains of Transmission of Ghadīr: From the Companions to the Books

An important point regarding the chain of transmission for this narration is that a large number of companions of the Prophet (p) have narrated it. When we say a large number, one should note that a vast majority of narrations are not transmitted by more than one-to-three companions, but there are a few limited narrations that have been transmitted by many more companions and this narration of Wilāyat is one of those.

From the perspective of the narration, the companions transmitted the narration to others, and some of these people who later became scholars then transmitted it for the next generation. Today the Ahl al-Sunnah possess ḥadīth books from 3^rd century hijri onwards in which this narration is preserved. The narration was also preserved in works before that, but many of those works have not reached us. Thus, the report is connected with a chain of transmitters leading back to the Prophet (p).

The narration of Ghadīr was transmitted by many companions, tābi‘īn, and later scholars of ḥadīth. Some authors in the 3^rd and 4^th centuries gathered the pathways of the narration of Ghadīr and preserved them in books. In other words, they gathered the chins of transmissions for them, one by one, even though the content of the ḥadīth is repetitive, but the wide variety of chains shows the strength of the report. Thus, no one should ask whether there is any work from the 1^st or 2^nd century where the ḥādīth of Ghadīr is recorded, and should not dispute us when we say they are preserved in 3^rd century works. As it has been said earlier, the narrations of the Ahl al-Sunnah are preserved in the works of Bukhārī, Muslim, and other authors that are all from 3^rd century onwards.

To become familiar with the chains of the ḥadīth of Ghadīr it suffices one to look at Tārīkh Dimashq of Ibn ‘Asākir and see how many companions and tābi‘īn transmit this report. Fortunately, today we are able to use digital search features to browse through classical works and one sees the plethora of sources for the Ghadīr tradition in old books of the Ahl al-Sunnah in a short time.

Political Tensions after the Demise of the Prophet (p) & Casting Away Ghadīr 

After the event of Ghadīr took place and many had congratulated Imam ‘Alī (a), the Prophet (p) went back to Medina and fell ill. During his illness, a few events took place which all show that the atmosphere was not pleasant. Firstly, it was expected that an army goes toward Sham under the command of Usāma b. Zayd, but the companions did not listen to the Prophet (p) as they assumed the Prophet (p) would pass away soon and that it was better for them to remain in Medina!

Another event is known as the Yawm al-Khamīs, an event recorded in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī too, where the Prophet (p) asked to write something down so that people would not go astray after him, but chaos ensued, and they did not give the Prophet (p) an opportunity to write down. Some even said – we seek refuge in Allah – that the Prophet (p) is delusional.

For a few days, the Prophet (p) was unable to come to the congregational prayers and some decided to put Abū Bakr as a leader instead. However, as soon as the Prophet (p) became aware of this, he dragged himself to the mosque and stood in front of Abū Bakr. These and other similar events show that the political situation was not the best.

Once the events of Saqifa took place, the cause of which was the Aws and Khazraj tribes, it triggered some of the other companions and created another chaotic situation. Two-three men from the Muhājirīn came and by casting aside the Anṣār, decided to place themselves as the rightful candidates for the caliphate. It is obvious that in this atmosphere, no one would care about Ghadīr. Although the name of ‘Alī (a) was mentioned during Saqīfa, as Ibn Athīr records it in his al-Kāmil, no one paid any attention to it.

When you have a sensitive political crisis and a group of people are inciting the situation further, many things get forgotten. For many years the Prophetic ḥadīth were also not allowed to be written and this has been explained at length in books pertaining to the history of ḥādīth. The companions thereafter became occupied with the conquests and spoils of war. In fact, companions eventually began conflicting amongst themselves and these conflicts eventually led to the assassination of ‘Uthmān. In this period, we do not know to what extent the ḥadīth of Ghadīr was remembered.

What is key is that when Imam ‘Alī (a) became caliph, one group of people who gave their allegiance to him – as per Ṭabarī – did so based on the notion of mawālāt. Secondly, when the Imam became recognized officially as a caliph, the battle of Jamal took place soon after, which led to the killing of many companions. The Imam (a) went from Basra to Kufa and in Masjid Kufa he gathered people, amongst which were many companions as well. Over there he asked whoever was present on the day of Ghadīr should stand up and testify to what transpired on that day. A few men stood up and gave a testimony. After this event, the ḥadīth of Ghadīr was re-established. If the Imam (a) did not do this, without a doubt, there would not have been a trace left of the ḥadīth of Ghadīr.

This event is known as the ḥadīth of Munāshada or ḥadīth of Ruḥba. A book titled Iḥyā’ al-Ghadīr fī Madīna al-Kūfa: Dirāsat Ḥal Munāshada al-Ruḥba was also written as a commentary on this event. In this event the Imam (a) gave a sermon in the Masjid and asked those who were present in Ghadīr to testify to the event and that those who do not do so will be cursed. Note that the event of Ghadīr is also transmitted in other events and people like Ibn ‘Abbās were insistent in transmitting the details of the event, one example of which can be found in Ansāb al-Ashrāf.²

Doubts about the ḥadīth of Ghadīr also existed from those early days. One interesting example is that of Abū Layla who says, “We were standing and waiting for a funeral to pass by. Zayd b. Arqam was also present. Someone came and asked, ‘O Abū ‘Āmir! Did you hear on the day of Ghadīr Khumm that the Prophet (p) said to ‘Alī, ‘Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ Abū Layla said: “I said to Zayd b. Arqam, “Did the Messenger of Allah really say this?” Zayd said: ‘Yes, he said it four times.’”³

Ḥadīth Munāshada of Ghadīr: How the Imam Revived Ghadīr in Masjid Kufa 

As was alluded, the ḥadīth of Ghadīr has also been transmitted independently of the event in which companions testified to the event in Masjid Kufa. For example, Abū Hurayra reports the ḥadīth of Ghadīr as recorded in Ansāb al-Ashrāf of Balādhurī⁴ which is an important book of history for the Ahl al-Sunnah from the middle of the second or early third century.

From Abī Hurayra (may Allah be please with him) who said: I looked at the Messenger of Allah (p) at Ghadīr Khumm, while he was standing and speaking, and ‘Ali was standing beside him. He took the hand of Ali and made him stand up and said: “Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla.”

However, as it was said earlier, the ḥādīth of Munāshada, the event in which the Imam (a) asks the companions to stand up and testify that they had seen the event of Ghadīr with their own eyes, becomes the basis for narrations in later books. We will mention two examples. The first example is from the famous Tabi‘ī who said that he had heard the ḥādīth of Ghadīr from Imam ‘Alī (a) in Ruḥba. This Ruḥba is the same story of Masjid Kufa where the Imam (a) came after the battle of Jamal and had to recall the ḥadīth of Ghadīr in order to get more loyalty and obedience from people during those times of crisis.

‘Abd al-Raḥmān b. Abī Layla said: I heard ‘Ali – in Ruḥba – call upon people asking them who had heard the Messenger of Allah saying, “Alī is the mawla of whomsoever I am their mawla. O Allah befriend the one who befriends him and hate the one who hates him.”? Twelve men who participate in Badr stood up and testified that they had heard the Messenger of Allah say, “Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla. O Allah befriend the one who befriends him and hate the one who hates him.”⁵

A second example is as follows:

Sulaymān b. Aḥmad narrates from Aḥmad b. Ibrāḥīm b. ‘Abdullah b. Kaysān al-Madaynī in the year 290 AH, from Ismā‘īl b. ‘Amr al-Bajalī from Mus‘ir from Ṭalḥa b. Muṣarraf from ‘Umayra b. Sa‘d who said: ‘Ali called on the companions of the Messenger of Allah from the pulpit asking them who had heard the Prophet (p) on the day of Ghadīr Khumm saying what he (p) said. So twelve men from them stood up, Abu Hurayra, Abū Sa‘īd and Anas b. Mālik was from among them and testified that they heard the Prophet (p) say, “Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla. O Allah befriend the one who befriends him and hate the one who hates him.”⁶

Despite all these authentic and reliable chains of transmissions for Ghadīr, for someone like Ibn Ḥazm to say, “The report ‘Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla’ is not authentically transmitted from reliable individuals at all,” is not only injustice but shamelessness. The editor of the book Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba of Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal who considers this report authentic comments on Ibn Ḥazm’s opinion saying, “This statement of his has horrendous recklessness, for the transmitters of this ḥadīth are from the most trustworthy individuals and are well known.”⁷

This Saudi Sunni editor should also realize that such an authentic narration is not seen even in the works of Muslim or Bukhārī! This means that these authors ascribed to the extreme school of Ahl al-Ḥadīth of Baghdad that emerged before Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal. This is despite the fact that Bukhārī in his al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr introduces a few ḥadīth narrators as those who appear in the ḥadīth of Man Kunto Mawla Fa-Hadhā ‘Alīyun Mawla.

Political Pressure by the Umayyads: Omitting Ghadīr to Altering its Meaning

One must remember two important contextual points. Firstly, many did not transmit the ḥadīth of Ghadīr out of fear of the Umayyads, just as Sa’īd b. Jubayr says:

I heard the ḥādīth Man Kunto Mawla Fa ‘Alīyun Mawla from Ibn ‘Abbās, but I concealed it.⁸

Furthermore, they would alter the meaning of the narration so that it does not entail the meaning of Imamate. Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal was asked what the ḥadīth means, to which he responds, we only narrate the ḥadīth, but we do not ask questions about it.⁹

The Shī‘a and the lovers of Imam ‘Ali (a), whose quantity was very little due to the immense political pressure of the first few caliphs and the ninety years of the Umayyads who were staunch enemies of the ‘Alids and Ahl al-Bayt, believed that the narration of Ghadīr means Imamate. Naturally, the Shī‘a were very few in number and under political pressure during these times and their voice was rarely heard. One very interesting case is a report in which ‘Uday b. Ḥātim Ṭā’ī appears in front of Mu‘āwīya and mentions the ḥadīth of Ghadīr and say:

Did the Messenger of Allah not introduce ‘Alī (a) as a flag bearer on the farewell pilgrimage, and then introduce ‘Alī (a) on Ghadīr Khumm as: Of whomsoever I am their mawla, Alī is (also) their mawla. O Allah befriend the one who befriends him and hate the one who hates him, and abandon one who abandons him, and help one who helps him.¹⁰

Once ‘Amr b. ‘Āṣ insulted Imam ‘Alī (a) in the presence of Mu‘āwīyah and someone by the name of Bard from the tribe of Hamdān was present there. He said, we have heard from our forefathers that the Prophet (p) said about ‘Alī (a): Man Kunto Mawla Fa-Hadhā ‘Alīyun Mawla.¹¹

On one occasion, Sa‘d b. Waqqāṣ tells Mu‘āwīyah that ‘Alī is more deserving to be a ruler than him, upon which Mu‘āwīyah asks why. Sa‘d says: Because the Messenger of Allah said, Man Kunto Mawla Fa ‘Alīyun Mawla.¹²

This is all the while the freed clients (mawālī) of the caliphs from the Ahl al-Sunnah whose entire identity was made upon Saqīfa and the caliphate of Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthmān, and the Umayyads would support them, believed this narration did not mean ‘Alī was appointed as an Imam. Of course, no one should expect them to hold any other opinion on this matter. Thousands of pages have been written in books of theology on both camps, and both sides have presented their arguments for or against these interpretations. These discussions can be traced back to the 1^st century and the Sunnis even recorded a story of Ḥasan Muthanna with a “Rāfiḍī” to show that the former did not believe in Ghadīr being an explicit designation.¹³

At the very minimum, the significance of this story is that in the second half of the 1^st century the ḥadīth of Ghadīr was being used in discussions on Imamate. Ahl al-Sunnah claimed that the words of this ḥadīth do not mean the appointment of a caliphate, while Shī‘ī theologians would say terms like Wilāyat, Walī, and Awla refer to Imamate. We must not ignore the religious and political power of the Ahl al-Sunnah in these discussions. It is of utmost significance to note that for 90 years the Umayyads attempted to remove any trace of the concept of Wilāyat and Imamate of the Ahl al-Bayt, and the ḥadīth tradition and schools of the Ahl al-Sunnah were also formed during this period, although later on the Abbasids calmed the atmosphere down a little.

It is only natural that in this sort of an atmosphere the ḥādīth of Ghadīr had to be safeguarded. The Shī‘a, though they were in minority, used Ghadīr as a backbone to protect their faith and strengthen their loyalty and support of Imam ‘Alī (a).

When ‘Abd al-Salam Yashkurī who was from the Khawārij rebelled in the year 160 AH and insulted Imam ‘Alī (a) in his statements, Mahdī the ‘Abbasid caliph wrote a letter reminding him of a “true authentic ḥadīth from the Messenger”, meaning the ḥadīth of Man Kunto Mawla Fa ‘Alīyun Mawla.¹⁴

‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz and Ḥadīth of Ghadīr

As per an entry that Abū al-Faraj Iṣfahānī records in his al-Aghānī¹⁵, ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz said that he saw a few men who had seen the Prophet (p) who said that the Prophet (p) said: Man Kunto Mawla Fa ‘Alīyun Mawla. The narration is as follows:

A man by the name of Yazīd b. ‘Īsa from the freed clients of Imam ‘Alī (a) in Khanāṣirah – a city near Ḥalab – went to ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz while he was giving strangers 200 Dirhams (silver coins). ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz said to Yazīd b. ‘Īsa: “Where are you from?” He said: “Hijaz.” ‘Umar asked: “Where in Hijaz?” He said: “Medina.” ‘Umar asked: “Which tribe?” He said: “Quraysh.” ‘Umar said: “Which clan?” He said: “Banī Hāshim.” ‘Umar asked: “From which group amongst the Banī Hāshim?” He said: “From the freed clients of ‘Alī” and he went silent. ‘Umar asked: “Which ‘Alī?” He responded: “Son of Abū Ṭālib.”

‘Umar sat down, opened his cloak, put his hands on his chest, and said: “And I am – by Allah – from the freed clients (mawālī) of ‘Alī.” Then he said, “I testify that a number of people who had seen the Prophet (p) said that he (p) said: “Man Kunto Mawla Fa ‘Alīyun Mawla.” Thereafter – while he gave 200 Dirhams to others – gave 50 Dinars (gold coins) to Yazīd due to his love (wilā’) for ‘Alī. Then he asked him, “Do you get a stipend from the Bayt al-Māl?” Yazīd said, “No.” ‘Umar then allocated a stipend for him and asked him to go back to his town, telling him that whatever others in that town are receiving, you will also receive it.¹⁶

Why did Ṭabarī – the Historian – Write a Book on Ghadīr?

As mentioned already, the ḥādīth of Wilāyat has been recorded in numerous books of ḥadīth and Shī‘ī authors from the very onset have been trying to prove the tawātur of this ḥadīth is far more than other narrations. In recent years, as books of the Ahl al-Ḥadīth from 3^rd and 4^th centuries have been published, such as Faḍā’il al-Ṣāḥāba of Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal or al-Sunnah of Abū Bakr Khilāl and similar works, it becomes clear that the ḥadīth of Ghadīr was well accepted by the Ahl al-Ḥadīth or the Sunnis of Baghdad, who also happened to be some of the most extreme groups of the Ahl al-Sunnah.

Naturally, moderate Sunnis such as the Ahl al-Sunnah of Iṣfahān in the 5^th century tried very hard to affirm this ḥadīth. Over here we want to share a very important point. From the early days, there has been a question that if the story of Ghadīr truly took place, why did a historian like Ya‘qūbī report this event, but Ṭabarī did not report it? The answer to this is very straightforward. Though the ḥadīth of Wilāyat existed in the sources, the extreme leaders of the Ḥanbalī school in Baghdad were not very keen on spreading this narration. Furthermore, they would transmit the narration in a way that would have alterations in it. For example, they would say Imam ‘Alī (a) was in Yemen before the Hajj in the 10^th hijri and there was a conflict between him and some of the companions. This conflict was brought up to the Prophet (p) and the Prophet (p) then said: “Man Kunto Mawla...”

This story was crafted in contrast to the famous ḥadīth of Ghadīr in order to showcase Ghadīr as an ordinary event. One person even said that the Imam was in Yemen that year and did not even come to Hajj, let alone Ghadīr. When this opinion reaches Muḥammad b. Jarīr Ṭabarī, he decided to write a book in which the transmission pathways of the ḥadīth of Wilāyat are compiled. Before explaining this point, it is important to know what it means for an author to compile the pathways of a ḥadīth in a book.

Ṭabarī gathers all the transmission pathways of this narration and compiles them in a two-volume book. According to the testimony of historians and scholars of ḥādīth, the book existed until the 8^th century and Shams al-Dīn Dhahabī summarized the book and the work was published many years ago. I have also gathered the comments and remarks of all those who had seen the book and had transmitted from it and published them all in a book. This matter shows Ṭabarī does not record Ghadīr in his al-Tārīkh, because he was concerned of being condemned by others and since he wanted to write a book that was accepted by all, refrained from recording this event. This is a common tactic used by some historians of that era who had such reservations. The fact that he was accused of Tashayyu‘ in Baghdad, and his body laid without being buried for three days, shows how extreme some of the Hanbalis of Baghdad were.

The Later Imams Announcing the Day as an Eid

The fact that Ghadīr is known as an Eid is something that needs to be explained. In general, the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt from the very onset emphasized performing a specific prayer on the day of Ghadīr, and recommended fasting on the day. Mufaḍḍal b. ‘Umar al-Ju‘fī narrates from Imam Ṣādiq (a) that fasting on the day of Ghadīr is a kaffārah for sixty years of sins.¹⁷ For this reason, the day of Ghadīr was mentioned in the religious calendars of the Muslims from very early on. In the book Zayn al-Akhbār of Gardīzī (d. 433) which is a Sunni history work, the author explicitly points out the 18^th of Dhū al-Ḥijjah as the day of Ghadīr.¹⁸

Amongst the Shī‘a, because of the emphasis the Imams (p) put on this day, it was considered a day of Eid from very early on. We will cite one narration as an example:

Al-Ḥasan b. Rāshid says to Imam Ṣādiq (a): “May I be sacrificed upon you, do the Muslims have an EId other than the two Eids?” The Imam (a) said, “Yes Ḥasan, one that is greater and nobler.” I said to him, “What day is it?” He (a) said, “It is the day on which the Commander of the Faithful (a) was appointed as a sign for people.” I said, “May I be sacrificed upon you, what is recommended for us to do on that day?” He (a) said, “Fast on that day O Ḥasan, and send many salutations upon Muḥammad and his progeny, and disassociate from those who oppressed them. The Prophets would command their executors to consider the day that they are appointed as the executor as an Eid.” I said, “What is the reward for one who fasts on the day?” He (a) said, “The fast for 60 months.”¹⁹

A narration from Abū Hurayra on the topic of Ghadīr also exists where the day has been remembered as an Eid. In the worst of political turmoil and pressure, these few reports show the significance of this day and how it deserves to be considered an Eid. The narration by Abū Hurayrah is recorded in a history book of the Ahl al-Sunnah:

‘Abdullah b. ‘Alī b. Muḥammad b. Bishrān narrated to us from ‘Alī b. ‘Umar al-Ḥāfiẓ, from Ḍumra b. Rabī‘ah al-Qarashī from Ibn Shūdhab from Maṭr al-Warrāq from Shahr b. Ḥawshab from Abī Hurayrah who said:

One who fasts on the 18^th of Dhī al-Ḥijjah, which is the day of Ghadīr Khumm, sixty months of fasts are written down for them. It was the day when the Prophet (p) took the hand of ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib and said, “Am I not the walī of the believers?”, and the companions said, “Yes O Messenger of Allah.” He (p) said: “Man Kunto Mawla Fa-‘Alīyun Mawla.” So ‘Umar b. al-Khaṭṭāb said, “Congratulations O son of Abī Ṭālib, today you have become our mawla and the mawla of all Muslims.” Then Allah sent the verse [5:3] Today I have perfected for you your religion.²⁰

Making the Day of Ghadīr an Official Day of Eid During the Buyid Dynasty

As has been said earlier, the day of Ghadīr found its place in the religious calendar of the Muslims. Abū Rayḥān Bīrūnī (d. 440) in the 5^th century also mentions that the 18^th of Dhūal-Ḥijjah is known as the day of Ghadīr Khumm, which is a name of a station where the Prophet (p) stopped from the farewell pilgrimage. He gathered all the saddles, climbed on top, and grabbed the arm of ‘Alī b. Abī Ṭālib and said: “O people, do I not have more authority over you than you yourselves?” They replied: “Yes.” So he (p) said: “Whosoever’s mawla I am, then ‘Alī (a) is also his mawla. O Allah, love the one who loves him, and hate the one who hates him, assist the one who assists him, and abandon the one who abandons him, and make the truth flow with him wherever he goes.” It is also transmitted that he raised his (p) head towards the sky and said, “O Allah, have I propagated it?” three times.²¹ Bīrūnī ends up citing the entire story of Ghadīr in his work and the calendars of that era were generally at the disposal of Abū Rayḥān and they all mentioned the day of Ghadīr.

During the Buyid Dynasty two days were given a lot of importance. First was the day of ‘Āshūrā’, a day that the Imams and the Shī‘a considered a day of mourning from the very early years, but away from the sight of the rulers. The second day was the day of Ghadīr which was also considered a day of Eid, but once again not very openly. When the Buyid same into Baghdad, these Shī‘ī commemorations became public and the community commemorated these events with a lot of enthusiasm.

Looking at historical works such as al-Muntaẓim etc. we see that the Shī‘a on this day would often be attacked by opponents and this would lead to sectarian conflict, even deaths or certain districts would be lit on fire. In any case, these commemorations eventually become more prominent, and in later centuries, such as under the Safavid and Qajar Dynasties, they were commemorated with full force.

When Ibn ‘Abd al-Birr al-Andalūsī (d. 463) transmits the ḥadīth of Ghadīr, he writes that on the day of Ghadīr Khumm the Prophet (p) said what he said about ‘Alī (a). This shows that in their works the phrase “the day of Ghadīr Khumm” was well-known. The full report is as follows:

Burayda, Abū Hurayrah, Jābir, al-Barrā’ b. ‘Āzib and Zayd b. Arqam all narrate from the Prophet (p) that he said on the day of Ghadīr Khumm: “Man Kunto Mawla, Fa-‘Aliyun Mawla, O Allah befriend one who befriends him, and hate the one who hates him. Although some do not transmit more than the line, Man Kunto Mawla Fa-‘Aliyun Mawla.²²

Arabic and Persian Poetry on Ghadīr Over the Centuries 

One other significant dimension of Ghadīr is how it was reflected in Arabic poetry, and then later in Persian poetry. Arab poets from the very early days until today have written poetry about Ghadīr. Poetry about Ghadīr in the earlier centuries became one of the most interesting literary subjects, and a scholar who has spent the most amount of work gathering all the works of poetry, their commentary, and details about the poets who composed the Ghadīrīyyah is ‘Allāmah Amīnī. His book, al-Ghadīr is published in 11 volumes in Arabic and contains three main discussions: 1) The chains for the ḥadīth of Ghadīr, 2) The literary works on Ghadīr in chronological order by century, and 3) Important details from the history of Islam and lives of the caliphs.

Other than the first volume which concerns the chains of transmissions for the ḥadīth, the remaining volumes contain poetry, literary prose and some historical discussions. ‘Allāmah Amīnī put in a lot of effort to gather all poetry about Ghadīr in this work.

One of the earliest poets who composed a Ghadīrīyyah was Sayyid Ḥimyari in the 2^nd century. Later on, Persian poetry also became popular and there are a lot of Ghadīrīyyahs written in Persian. The oldest poetry on this topic is the poem by Nāṣir Khusraw Qubādīyānī (d. 1070 CE) who refers to Ghadīr in a number of places in his works.

شرف مـرد بـهنگام پـدیـد آید از او چون پدید آمد تشریف علی روز غدیر

بر سر خلق مرو را چو وصی کرد نبی این، به اندوه در افتاد از او، آن به زحیر

حسد آمد همگان را زچنان کار از او برمیدند و رمیده شود از شیر، حمیر

او سزاید که وصی بود نبی را در خلق که برادرش بُد و بِن عم و داماد و وزیر

1. Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba, vol. 2, pg. 739; Ansāb al-Ashrāf, vol. 2, pg. 356.
2. Vol. 2, pg. 355.
3. Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba, vol. 2, pg. 741
4. Vol. 2, pg. 356.
5. Tārīkh Baghdād, vol. 14, pg. 240.
6. Tārīkh Iṣbahān, vol. 1, pg. 142.
7. Faḍā’il al-Ṣaḥāba, footnote on vol. 2, pg. 703.
8. Faḍā’il al-Ṣāḥāba, vol. 2, pg. 703.
9. Al-Sunnah of Abu Bakr Khallāl, pg. 346-347. The literal quote is: “Do not speak about the report, leave the ḥadīth as it has come.
10. Akhbār al-Wāfidīn ‘ala Mu‘āwīyah, pg. 23.
11. Al-Imāmah wa al-Siyāsah, vol. 1, pg. 129.
12. Ansāb al-Ashrāf, vol. 5, pg. 87-88.
13. Al-Sunnah of Abū Bakr Khallāl, pg. 350, #465; and Ṭabaqāt al-Kubra, vol. 5, pg. 245.
14. Tārīkh Khalīfa b. Khayyāṭ, pg. 292-293.
15. Vol. 9, pg. 181
16. Al-Aghānī, vol. 4, pg. 181.
17. Miṣbāḥ al-Mutahajjid, pg. 736.
18. Pg. 466.
19. Miṣbāḥ al-Mutahajjid, pg. 736-737.
20. Tārīkh Baghdād, vol. 8, pg. 284.
21. Athār al-Bāqīyah, pg. 431
22. Al-Istī‘āb fī Ma‘rifah al-Aṣḥāb, vol. 3, pg. 1099.