Evaluation of the Ghadir Khumm Incident

Abstract

In this research while examining Ali's succession, the basic sources of Shi'a and Ahl-i Sunnah were used as reference. According to the Shi’a, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) assigned Ali as his successor at the place called Ghadir Khumm and those who were there, particularly Abu Bakr and Umar witnessed that. Shi’a, who tries to support his views with verses, accepts this event as one of the five basics of Islam, whereas Ahl’i Sunnah sees this event took place at Ghadir Khumm as related to some problems between Ali and the soldiers occurred after the expedition from Yemen. In this study it was concluded that the verses which Shi’a using to justify Ali’s succession are not relevant. In this context, the inability to remember, as if with an abdication of reason, of people who witnessed the events at Ghadir Khumm, in the power struggles while Ali was living led to the conclusion that this incident was constructed with sectarian feelings and thoughts.SummaryGhadir Khumm, which consists of a combination of the Word ghadir meaning “dense woodland” and the Word hum meaning “pond” in Arabic, was on the left side of the road between Mecca and Madina away from Cuhfe about one, two, three or four miles. It was a pond that had become a swamp and reeds due to frequent rains.The Ghadir Khumm Incident which Shia considers as the most important valid evidence for Ali’s succession has been controversial throughout the history. The basic of this controversion is viewpoint of the both sides. According to Shia belief, while the Muslims were returning from the Farewell Pilgrimage, when the verse saying “O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; and if you don't do it, you have not delivered His message (at all); and Allah will protect you from the people “(Qur’an 5: 67)” was revealed Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) delivered a lengthy sermon in which he announced Ali was his heir by saying “Anyone who has me as his mawla, has Ali as his mawla.” Yet more Shia claimed that Ali received the congratulations of the Muslims who acclaimed him as Amir al-Mu’minin. Among these well-wishers were the later caliphs Abu Bakr and Umar. Shia stated that after the oaths of allegiance and congratulations the official appointment of Ali as Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) successor was completed with the revelation of third verse of Al-Ma'idah saying: “This day I have perfected your Religion for you: Completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your Religion.” According to the Shia this event is one of the five basics of Islam. However, the witnesses of this incident did not make it a current issue in the course of the power struggles. Even Ali did not mention about it during the Abu Bakr’s caliphate despite the fact that he uttered his annoyance about Abu Bakr’s caliphate several times. It means even Ali was aware of his succession. Because the clear evidence like this would be an enormous opportunity for Ali and his supporters. However, the main actors of the conflict were almost within the eclipse of reason and could not remember this evidence which definitely could heal the breach.The basis of the Ghadir Khumm incident, which Shia has turned into an object of faith, is far from being convincing. For, the matter mentioned in the sixty-seventh verse of Al-Ma'idah, which is connected with this event, is not about the succession of Ali but just announcement of all the commands and prohibition which Allah orders at any cost. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who pursued the balance between all the parts of the society was wary of public’s revulsion when the verses were revealed about the Jews, Christians and polytheists. The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was worried about people’s reaction and by sending this verse, Allah eliminated the fear that the Messenger of Him (pbuh) and made it clear that he did not need to worry about and that he was spiritually protected. In terms of tafsir methodology it is not a correct approach to try to understand the verses by decontextualizing them. For, the third verse of Al-Ma'idah was decontextualized by Shia in compliance with their factional views. In this context, when this verse is taken into consideration before and after, it is seen that it is not related to imamat or succession but includes provisions on haram, halal, orders and prohibitions. This verse being one of the last verses and revelation of no further orders and prohibitions on legislation supports this view. Allah tried to prevent people from misunderstanding by sending the revelation clearly. For this reason, if Ali’s succession had been determined by Him it would have been revealed and understood clearly. The Sunnî sources connects the event with Ali’s campaign in Yemen, from which he had just returned prior to accompanying Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) on the Farewell Pilgrimage. In Ghadir Khumm the soldiers who participated this campaign accused of Ali the distribution of booty, bondswoman issue, not letting riding on zakat camels and wearing clothes belongs to the booty during the expedition. Thereupon, the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) made a speech emphasizing the importance of friendship and brotherhood in order to placate both sides and settled the matter by saying “Anyone who has me as his comrade, has Ali as his comrade” in this context. Therefore, The Ghadir Khumm incident, which Shia has turned into a matter of faith, was constructed with sectarian feelings and thoughts and its legitimacy was supported by verses decontextualized.

Özet

Bu araştırmada Hz. Ali’nin velâyeti incelenirken Şîa ve Ehl-i sünnetin temel kaynakları referans olarak kullanılmıştır. Şîa’ya göre Hz. Peygamber, Hz. Ali’yi Gadîr-i Hum denilen yerde vasî tayin etmiş, başta Hz. Ebû Bekir ve Hz. Ömer olmak üzere orada bulunanlar ise buna tanıklık etmişlerdir. Görüşlerini âyetlerle desteklemeye çalışan Şîa, bu düşüncesini İslâm’ın beş temel şartından biri olarak kabul etmiştir. Ehl-i sünnet ise Gadîr-i Hum’da meydana gelen olayı Hz. Ali’nin Yemen seferi dönüşü askerler arasında yaşanan bazı problemlerle ilişkili olarak değerlendirmektedir. Yapılan incelemede Şîa’nın Hz. Ali’nin vasiliğini meşrulaştırmak için kullandığı âyetlerin konuyla ilgili olmadığı değerlendirmesinde bulunulmuştur. Bu bağlamda Hz. Ali’nin yaşadığı dönemlerde meydana gelen iktidar mücadelelerinde olayın kahramanlarının âdeta akıl tutulması yaşayarak onu hatırlayamamaları, bu hadisenin mezhebî duygu ve düşüncelerle inşa edilerek kurgulandığı sonucunu doğurmuştur.