The Friday sermon for May 29, 2026 (corresponding to 12 Thu al-hijjah 1447 AH) - Sayed Hashim Behbehani Mosque - Sheikh Ali Hassan Ghuloum - Kuwait

 

The 1st sermon:

The Day of Rahba:The Echo of Ghadir in the Courtyard of Kufa

A persistent question often arises: Why did Imam Ali (peace be upon him) not invoke the momentous events of the Day of Ghadir as proof? Why does its mention remain absent from the pages of Nahj al-Balagha? Could it be that the event never truly transpired, or did it simply bear no lasting significance—nothing more than a fleeting, historical footnote?

To address this, I will draw upon the scholarship of a contemporary master of Hadith, Nasser al-Din al-Albani, a prominent figure of the Salafi school of thought. I quote directly from his encyclopedic work, Al-Silsila al-Sahihah (The Authentic Series), under entry number 1750, as narrated on the authority of Abu al-Tufayl:

His given name was Amir ibn Wathila al-Kinani. Born in the third year of the Hijra, he was blessed to see the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. He later migrated to Kufa, where he rose to become an esteemed leader and one of the town’s most noble dignitaries. Following the martyrdom of Imam Ali, he relocated to Mecca, where he ultimately passed away.

Abu al-Tufayl relates: “[Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, gathered the people at al-Rahbah.”

Al-Rahbah refers here to the open courtyard of the Great Mosque of Kufa—the unroofed, central expanse of the sanctuary.

 “He then implored them, saying: ‘I adjure before Allah every Muslim who heard the Messenger of Allah [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him and his family] on the Day of Ghadir Khumm to stand and bear witness to what he heard.’ At this, thirty men stood [and in another transmission: a vast multitude of people arose]. They testified that the Prophet had taken Ali by the hand and addressed the gathering: ‘Do you not know that I hold a greater right over the believers than they hold over their own souls?’ They replied, ‘Yes, O Messenger of Allah.’ He then declared, ‘"For whomever I am a master, Ali is also his master. O Allah, befriend those who befriend him, and oppose those who oppose him.’ Abu al-Tufayl continues: ‘I left the gathering with a lingering doubt stirring in my heart, and it was in this state that I crossed paths with Zayd ibn Arqam.’”

Zayd ibn Arqam was a revered Companion of the Prophet, hailing from the Ansar’s Khazraj tribe. In his youth, the Messenger of Allah passed away. He later settled in Kufa, where he lived until his death in 66 AH.

 “I said to Zayd, ‘I heard Ali say such-and-such.’ To this, Zayd responded, ‘What is there to deny? I myself heard the Messenger of Allah [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] say precisely that to him.’”

Al-Albani then offers his analytical commentary, noting: “It was recorded by Ahmad [4/370], Ibn Hibban in his Sahih [2205 - Mawarid al-Zan’an], Ibn Abi Asim [1367 and 1368], al-Tabarani [4968], and al-Diya in Al-Mukhtarah [No. 527, under my own critical verification].”

He further observes: “Its chain of transmission is authentic (sahih) according to the stringent criteria of al-Bukhari.” This signifies that the report rigorously satisfies the structural rules established by Imam al-Bukhari for validating historical narrations in his compendium.

Al-Albani concludes: “Al-Haythami noted in Al-Majma’ [9/104]: ‘Narrated by Ahmad, and its transmitters are the men of the Sahih [the authentic corpus]’—meaning their names are preserved within the trusted registry of Sahih al-Bukhari—‘with the sole exception of Fitr ibn Khalifa, who is nonetheless a thoroughly reliable (thiqah) narrator.’”

In our upcoming second sermon, we shall pause to contemplate the profound implications and deeper meanings embedded within this historical testament.

The 2nd sermon:

The Implications of the Hadith of al-Rahbah

In the first sermon, I spoke of the Narration of al-Rahbah. What, then, are the profound implications of this historical account?

1. This event is famously chronicled as the Hadith of the Day of al-Rahbah. Historical analysis indicates that these events most likely unfolded after the year 35 AH, following the Battle of the Camel, when Imam Ali relocated his residence to Kufa.
2. The catalyst for this public appeal was that the Commander of the Faithful had previously spoken of how the Messenger of Allah (pbuhf) favored and elevated him above others. Some of these very words were compiled by Sharif al-Radi in Nahj al-Balagha, such as the famous Sermon of al-Shiqshiqiyya. These statements were delivered out of a necessity to defend his position amidst a volatile political and security climate—an environment that had already ignited the Battle of the Camel and would soon lead to the grueling conflicts of Siffin and Nahrawan.

We must remember that the Imam was a newcomer to the society of Kufa. The vast majority of its population had never lived through the era of the Messenger of Allah (pbuhf). They only knew Ali through the rumors, narratives, and hearsay circulating around him—a volatile mix of truth and falsehood. Consequently, the Imam found himself compelled to define and affirm his divinely appointed station. This was born neither out of vanity, nor arrogance, nor a desire to place himself above others; rather, it was a necessary vindication of truth and an act of self-defense.

Word had reached the Imam that people were doubting his claims regarding the unique spiritual and political merits he possessed, chief among them being the question of Wilayah (guardianship) and governance after the passing of the Messenger of Allah (pbuhf).

Thus, he stood before the public gathering at al-Rahbah in Kufa and adjured them, just as the narration describes. In response, thirty Companions who were present at Ghadir Khumm stood up to bear witness for him, though some accounts suggest the number was slightly fewer.

3.      This pivotal stance—alongside other recorded instances—directly answers the critical dilemma I posed in the first sermon: Why did Imam Ali (peace be upon him) not invoke the event of Ghadir as proof? Why do we find no trace of it in Nahj al-Balagha? Was it because the event never actually took place, or because it held no real significance and was merely a passing incident?

The fundamental truth is that Nahj al-Balagha was compiled as a selective literary anthology. Al-Sharif al-Radi focused his efforts strictly on passages that exhibited profound rhetorical elegance. It was never intended to serve as an exhaustive, comprehensive compendium of all of Ali’s (pbuh) oral and written legacy.

4.      The paramount importance of championing the truth and bearing honest witness, even if it goes against oneself or one's closest kin, can be seen in the Quran.

The Almighty declares: "O believers! Stand firm for justice as witnesses for Allah even if it is against yourselves, your parents, or close relatives. Be they rich or poor, Allah is best to ensure their interests."

This commands us never to allow a person’s social standing or personal status to influence our testimony. We must bear witness to the truth, even if the rightful party is poor or marginalized, and their opponent is wealthy or a person of high prestige.

The verse continues: "So do not let your desires cause you to deviate ˹from justice˺. If you distort the testimony or refuse to give it, then ˹know that˺ Allah is certainly All-Aware of what you do." [An-Nisa: 135].

In sum, what transpired on the Day of Ghadir is an undeniable historical certainty. Its narration has reached the status of absolute recurrence (tawatur) among Muslims, even if they diverge in interpreting the ultimate aims of that event and what the Prophet (pbuhf) intended by his words: "Whoever I am his master, then Ali is his master." When the Imam (pbuh)—on the Day of al-Rahbah in Kufa—implored those who had witnessed Ghadir to stand and testify, thirty companions of the Prophet arose, while others remained silent.

We might feel astonished, or even censorious, at the compliance of those who stayed silent—a silence born neither of absence nor forgetfulness. Yet, we must ask ourselves: if our own testimony were demanded in a dispute, and that testimony was against the people closest to us—our fathers, our brothers, or our children—what would our stance be? If we stand firmly by the truth, then we are truly among the followers (Shia) of Ali, mirroring those who bore witness for him on the Day of al-Rahbah, unswayed by the blame of any critic in the way of Allah. But if we recoil from the truth and bear false witness just to avoid embarrassment or out of tribalism for our kin, then we forfeit any right to blame those who withheld their testimony when the Imam appealed to them. In that moment, we would be no different from them, failing our moral test just as they failed theirs long ago.