What do you say about Khwaja Rabiʿ, Khwaja Murad, and Abu al-Salt al-Harawi?

---

And upon you be peace, and the mercy of Allah and His blessings

We will pause at each of these figures to the extent the occasion permits, in order to know who they were, and consequently to know about visiting their graves, which are spread around the holy city of Mashhad.

First: Khwaja Rabiʿ

The one known as Khwaja Rabiʿ, who has a grave on the outskirts of holy Mashhad, is al-Rabiʿ ibn Khuthaym, Abu Yazid al-Thawri al-Kufi, ibn ʿAʾid.

Rabiʿ ibn Khuthaym, as is clear from the historical data and from his description in the books of rijal, is a personality that is not sound: he stayed back from supporting the Commander of the Faithful, and he did not speak ill of Yazid when he killed Imam al-Husayn (a); he kept himself apart from the conflicts between truth and falsehood.

The most important stances mentioned in this regard are the following:

The first stance: he stayed back from supporting the Commander of the Faithful (a) in the war of Siffin. Together with four hundred men he admitted that he had doubts about this fighting, and they evaded [it] by asking the Imam to send them far away to some of the frontier posts. This text has been reported in Aʿyan al-Shiʿa, in which it came:

(They said: O Commander of the Faithful, we have doubts about this fighting, despite our knowledge of your merit; yet neither we, nor you, nor the Muslims can do without someone to fight the enemy with the Muslims. So appoint us over one of these frontier posts, so that we may be there, fighting on behalf of its people. So ʿAli (a) dispatched al-Rabiʿ ibn Khuthaym to the frontier post of Rayy)^[1].

It seems that the Imam acceded to their request in order to rid himself of their sedition, which might break out because of their stances of failing to support the truth.

The second stance: he stood neutral between Imam al-Husayn (a) and Yazid. He did not side with Imam al-Husayn (a) after his killing, and did not even agree to say the istirjaʿ (i.e., to say “Indeed we belong to Allah and to Him do we indeed return” (Qurʾan 2:156)) over the killing of the master of the youth of the people of Paradise. In addition to that, he did not speak ill of Yazid, and he said something indicating that he wanted to be neutral in that, and that he regarded the dispute between Imam al-Husayn (a) and Yazid as a dispute over worldly affairs; he said: (To Allah is their return, and upon Allah is their reckoning)^[2].

What is noticeable from the biography of Khwaja Rabiʿ in the biographical books of the ʿAmma (Sunnis) is that he is praised for his devotion, his asceticism and his withdrawal from the world and its affairs, to the extent that he would not ask anyone for anything; and he remained twenty years in which he did not speak about any worldly matter — he said to someone: “Is your mother alive?” throughout those twenty years; and it is said that he asked someone about his father, and regretted that.

This indicates that he was living a superficial, hollow faith, not understanding what religion is and what faith is; and al-Kashshi's statement about him that he was one of the eight ascetics establishes nothing but the attribute of asceticism, whose applications may be mistaken. For part of faith is mixing with people in the best manner and cooperating with them in good works, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, standing with the truth and rejecting injustice, in addition to adhering to the system of worship with sincerity.

A person's stances indicate the extent of his insight in religion; and what has been mentioned about Rabiʿ ibn Khuthaym (Khwaja Rabiʿ) is a deviation from the path of truth, even if it was in the garb of the people of religion and piety.

For his staying back from supporting the Commander of the Faithful (a) — as [reported] from (more than one of the ʿAmma and the Khassa (Shiʿa)), as Sayed al-Khuʾi (rh) says in Muʿjam al-Rijal — his not siding [with the Imam], his lack of sympathy with the calamity of Imam al-Husayn (a), and his not condemning Yazid for his deed, suffice to show his course, deviating from the path of faith.

Second: Khwaja Murad

As for the one called Khwaja Murad, he is Harthama ibn Aʿyan, Abu Habib.

He was one of the servants of al-Maʾmun the ʿAbbasid, yet he was a devotee of Imam al-Rida (a). Al-Shaykh al-Saduq narrated with a chain from him his account of the martyrdom of Imam al-Rida (a) and al-Maʾmun's poisoning of him. He is the one who narrated the incident of the poison, where the Imam informed him that this was the time of his departure, and of the tyrant's resolve to poison him in grapes and pomegranate; and he is the one who related to al-Maʾmun that the Imam (a) had confided to him the coming of a person to take charge of washing and burying the Imam upon his death, namely Imam al-Jawad (a).

Al-Hurr al-ʿAmili said of him in Ithbat al-Hudat: “He was one of the servants of the caliph ʿAbd Allah al-Maʾmun, yet he loved the Ahl al-Bayt to the utmost and counted himself among their Shiʿa. He undertook the service of al-Rida and [attending to] all his interests, preferring that over all his companions, despite his high rank with al-Maʾmun and his closeness to him”^[3].

The books of history mention him — among them al-Yaʿqubi in al-Buldan — [stating] that he was one of the brave commanders in the armies of the Banu al-ʿAbbas, that he treated well those he was sent to fight, and that he had a role in building and development. When the matter became firmly settled for al-Maʾmun after the martyrdom of Imam al-Rida (a), he accused him of treachery, reviled him and imprisoned him until he died in prison. It is said that al-Fadl ibn Sahl hated him and killed him secretly in his prison, and it is said that al-Maʾmun poisoned him; that was in the year 200 AH.

Third: Abu al-Salt al-Harawi

As for the one called Khwaja Abu al-Salt al-Harawi, he is ʿAbd al-Salam ibn Salih, from the city of Herat, one of the cities of ancient Khurasan, in Afghanistan. He was born in Medina in 160 AH. He was the servant of Imam al-Rida (a); he was a scholar and a great narrator, and he used to debate the deviant sects.

Al-Najashi said of him in his Rijal: “ʿAbd al-Salam ibn Salih, Abu al-Salt al-Harawi, narrated from al-Rida (a); trustworthy, sound in hadith; he has the book Wafat al-Rida (a)”^[4].

ʿAllama al-Hilli said of him in Khulasat al-Aqwal that he is trustworthy and sound in hadith^[5].

Perhaps al-Shaykh al-Tusi's statement about him that he was an ʿammi (Sunni) is due to his practicing taqiyya in the time of al-Maʾmun. This is what is attested for him in the books of the ʿAmma: some of them deemed him trustworthy, but they accused him of rafd (being a Rafidi), and some charged him with lying — not out of direct perception and knowledge, but only because he narrated many hadiths from Imam al-Rida (a) and on the merits of the Ahl al-Bayt (a).

Al-Kashshi reported, with a chain, from the ʿAmma that al-ʿAbbas al-Duri said: I heard Yahya ibn Naʿim say: Abu al-Salt is clean in hadith, and we have seen him hearing [hadith]; but he held Shiʿism, and no lying was seen from him.

Al-Kashshi said: Abu Bakr said: Abu al-Qasim Tahir ibn ʿAli ibn Ahmad narrated to me — he mentioned that he was born in Medina — he said: I heard Nazla ibn Qays al-Isfarayini say: I heard Ahmad ibn Saʿid al-Razi say: Abu al-Salt al-Harawi is trustworthy and reliable in hadith, except that he loves the family of the Messenger of Allah (s), and that was his religion and his school. (That is, his method was to narrate hadith concerning the right of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) and love for them).

Al-Tafrishi said in Naqd al-Rijal: What is apparent is that Abu al-Salt al-Harawi is one [person], and trustworthy, except that he mixed with the ʿAmma and narrated their reports, as appears from the words of al-Kashshi and the words of al-Shahid al-Thani (rh) in his gloss on al-Khulasa. Hence his status was confused for al-Shaykh — al-Tusi — (q), and he said: ʿammi^[6].

Sayed al-Khuʾi mentioned that al-Shaykh al-Tusi's expression that he was an ʿammi is a slip of his noble pen, because he was well known for openly declaring Shiʿi beliefs.

Something indicating that has been narrated from him in Sunan Ibn Maja. He said: Sahl ibn Abi Sahl and Muhammad ibn Ismaʿil narrated to us; they said: ʿAbd al-Salam ibn Salih, Abu al-Salt al-Harawi, narrated to us: ʿAli ibn Musa al-Rida narrated to us, from his father, from Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad, from his father, from ʿAli ibn al-Husayn, from his father, from ʿAli ibn Abi Talib, who said: The Messenger of Allah (s) said: “Faith is knowledge in the heart, affirmation with the tongue, and action with the limbs.” Abu al-Salt said: If this chain of transmission were recited over a madman, he would be cured.^[7]

One of the editors of Sunan Ibn Maja expressed rejection of the hadith, justifying that by accusing al-Harawi of Shiʿism and rafd, and he described al-Harawi's comment on the blessing of the names of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) — that if they were recited over a madman he would be cured — as “an exaggeration with no justification; Abu al-Salt is a weak, wicked Rafidi”^[8], according to what this man claims, because Abu al-Salt narrated numerous narrations from Imam al-Rida (a) and concerning the right of the Ahl al-Bayt (a).

Al-Dhahabi mentioned, concerning the reasons why a number of the scholars of the ʿAmma deemed him a liar, the following: that he inclines to Shiʿism, that he is a Rafidi, that he narrates marvels about the merit of ʿAli and his Household, that he is suspect, and that he mentions some narrations of faults (mathalib)^[9].

Ibn Hibban mentioned him in al-Majruhin with this description: ʿAbd al-Salam ibn Salih: Abu al-Salt al-Harawi, the righteous man, except that he is a staunch Shiʿi; Abu Hatim, Abu Zurʿa, al-ʿUqayli, Ibn ʿAdi, al-Nasaʾi and al-Daraqutni did not testify in his favor. ʿAbbas al-Duri said: I heard Yahya deem Abu al-Salt trustworthy; and also from him: He is not one who lies. Ahmad ibn Sayyar mentioned in Tarikh Marw that he was among the intimates of al-Maʾmun, who would send him forth to debate the Murjiʾa, the Jahmiyya and the Qadariyya. Then Ibn Sayyar said: I debated with him to draw out what he had, and I did not see him going to excess; I saw him giving precedence to Abu Bakr and ʿUmar and mentioning the Companions only with good words — except that there are hadiths that he narrates concerning faults^[10].

So it is because of his stances and his narrations on the merit of the Ahl al-Bayt (a) and on the faults of their enemies, and his narrating from Imam al-Rida (a), that the ʿAmma accused him of lying. However, the reports of al-Kashshi and the ʿAllama, and their explicit declaration of his trustworthiness, are the foundation; and describing him as an ʿammi is a confusion, due to his taqiyya.

In summary

Accordingly, believers ought not to head to the grave of any figure in order to revere and visit him, unless he is one of the Infallibles (a) or one who follows their path, since the holy Shariʿa has commanded us to visit our masters, the Prophet and his Household (a), and the righteous among their devotees, to keep ties with them, to revere them and to seek blessing through them.

So whoever visits Khwaja Murad because he believes in his Shiʿism, his love and his service to Imam al-Rida (a), and his bearing harm for that sake, and whoever visits Abu al-Salt for his Shiʿism and his devotion to transmitting narrations from the Ahl al-Bayt (a) and about their merit, will be rewarded for that. As for visiting Khwaja Rabiʿ and those like him, who deviated from the path of truth, it is something believers ought to abstain from, so that they do not contribute to revering one who does not deserve reverence.

------------------------

^[1] - Aʿyan al-Shiʿa, vol. 6, p. 455.

^[2] - See Muʿjam Rijal al-Hadith, al-Khuʾi, vol. 8, p. 175.

^[3] - Ithbat al-Hudat, al-Hurr al-ʿAmili, vol. 4, p. 377.

^[4] - Rijal al-Najashi, p. 246.

^[5] - Khulasat al-Aqwal, p. 209.

^[6] - See Naqd al-Rijal, vol. 3, p. 60.

^[7] - Sunan Ibn Maja, vol. 1, p. 25.

^[8] - See Sunan Ibn Maja, Dar al-Jil edition, vol. 1, pp. 89 and 90, printed in 1418 AH, edited by Bashshar ʿAwwad, 1st ed.

^[9] - Tarikh al-Islam wa Wafayat al-Mashahir wa al-Aʿlam, by al-Dhahabi, vol. 17, 251.

^[10] - al-Majruhin, Ibn Hibban, vol. 2, p. 151.