Introduction
The h̩adīth of al-Ghadir Khumm is highly significant in Shī‘ī historiography and theology. According to Lalani and Jafri this incident was an affirmation of the clear divine designation of ‘Alī as the Prophet’s religious and political successor. As such, the occasion of this h̩adīth is taken as a yearly celebration by Shī‘as.[1]
For Sunnīs on the other hand, this h̩adīth has no deep theological significance; it is merely one of many that extol the virtues of ‘Alī. The difference in the interpretation of this h̩adīth is due to the conflicting interpretation of the word mawlā, which has multiple meanings. In the context of this h̩adīth, the Shī‘a interpret mawlā to mean ‘Imām’, whereas as for Sunnīs it to means ‘close friend’.
The text of the hadith
The h̩adīth is as follows:
After stopping at al-Ghadīr Khumm, “The Prophet first asked the believers, “Am I not closer (awlā) to the believers than they are to themselves?” After the positive response of all present, he proclaimed, “Anyone who has me as his mawlā, has ʿAlī as his mawlā” (man kuntu mawlāhu fa-ʿAliyyun mawlāh).
Some versions of the hadith add a sentence: “O God, befriend the friend of ʿAlī and be the enemy of his enemy” (Allāhumma wālī man wālāhu ʿwa ʿādi man ʿādāh). In other versions of this tradition, the word mawlā is replaced by walī.[2] With these variations in wording, this ḥadīth is quoted in both Sunnī[3] and Shī‘ī books of h̩adīth and history.
An interesting orientalist perspective
Dakake
Two Western scholars discuss this h̩adīth in relation to the question of succession, and neither dispute its veracity. Dakake presents a thorough, 15-page discussion of the h̩adīth of al-Ghadir. In relation to the issue of succession, she examines the h̩adīth from a philological perspective. [4] She concludes that the wording of the h̩adīth points to “Alī’s unique position and unrivalled closeness to the Prophet” and not in any sense to the concept of Imamate, or ‘Alī’s distinction due to him being from ahl–bayt. [5] Had the Prophet used the term Imām rather than mawlā or walī, this would have clearly indicated political and spiritual authority and there would not be any ambiguity on the intent of the h̩adīth; namely the designation of ‘Alī as his successor. [6] Dakake further adds that ‘Alī, when enumerating his virtues during his conflict with Mu’āwiyah, mentioned this h̩adīth as confirmation of his merits, and not as evidence for his divine designation as successor to the Prophet. [7]
Veccia
Veccia, on the other hand, examines this h̩adīth in its historical context using Ibn Kathīr’s al-Bidāya wa ’l-nihāya. Ibn Kathir mentions that the event at al-Ghadir Khumm was connected to a number of complaints made against ‘Alī ibn Tālib regarding his distribution of booty. [8] Some individuals went as far as to question his integrity. This upset the Prophet, and he publicly declared his love for ‘Alī. [9] Veccia concludes that it was likely therefore that the statement made at al-Ghadir Khumm was to “to put an end to all these accusations”, and “to demonstrate publicly his esteem and love for ʿAlī.” [10]
Conclusion
Thus Veccia and Dakake both reach the same conclusion, albeit from different perspectives, that the h̩adīth of al-Ghadīr is not an evidence for the designation of ‘Alī as successor but a public declaration of the Prophet’s love for ‘Alī. This view is also supported by Halm, who stated the Prophet had not intended by it to designate a successor; and Ayoub, who states that the fact that the Ans̩ār met at Saqīfa to choose a successor meant that they did not understand the h̩adīth of al-Ghadir Khumm in the traditional Shī‘ī sense. [11] Both Halm and Ayoub devote only one sentence to the issue. Shaban, when discussing the h̩adīth, states that “it was highly improbable” that the Prophet would have appointed ‘Alī to be his successor, nor was it invoked in the succession debate. [12]
Notes:
[1] Jafri, p. 58.; Arzina R Lalani, Early Shi’i Thought: The Teachings of Imam Muhammad Al-Baqir, (IB Tauris, 2000), p. 6.
[2] ibid
[3] The Sunnī sources of this h̩adīth include Ibn Ḥanbal’s (d. 241/855) Musnad (passim), Ibn ʿAsākir’s (d. 571/1175–6) Taʾrīkh madīnat Dimashq of (42:187–238), and Ibn Kathīr’s (d. 774/1373) al-Bidāyah wa-l-nihāya (5:150–63) taken from Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali. “Ghadīr Khumm.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Third Edition.
[4] Maria Massi Dakake, The Charismatic Community: Shi’ite Identity in Early Islam, (SUNY Press, 2007), pp. 33-49.
[5] Ibid. p. 35.
[6] Ibid. p. 49.
[7] Ibid.p. 44
[8] Ibn Kat̲h̲īr, al-Bidāya wa ’l-nihāya, 1348-55, v, 208-14
[9] Veccia Vaglieri, L.. “G̲h̲adīr K̲h̲umm.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition.
[10] ibid
[11] Heinz Halm, Shi’ism, (Columbia University Press, 2004), p. 8.; Ayoub, p. 9.
[12] Shaban, p. 16.
