Précis of
Ahadith of Khums
Implication
of above Ahadith is clear in
many ways, while some of
cavillers try to make doubt
about their implication by
delusive objections and free
themselves from these Ahadith.
We mention
some of their objections for
instance.
1- They say
for Hadith of Muhammad ibn
Ash’ari (which correctness of
its evidence had proved):
کتب بعض اصحابنا الى ابى جعفر
الّئانى علیه السلام خبرنى عن
الخمس اعلى جمیع ما یستفید الرّجل
من قلیل و کثیر من جمیع الضّروب و
على الصّناع و کیف ذلک؟ فکتب
بخطّه علیه السلام الخمس بعد
المؤونة
One of
our companions wrote to ninth
Imam (a.s.): Inform us that if
Khums applies on all the things
which a person uses, from few
and many from any kind of income
and also on artisans? And how
should it be paid? Imam wrote
with his own handwriting that
Khums is after the costs of
living.
It is
understood well from this text
than asker has had doubt either
in generality and quality of
Khums and Imam has answered to
both questions with one short
sentence as it had been common
way in writing letters in that
time.
When he says
Khums is after the costs of
living the question about
quality which is the second
question of asker and also the
question about the necessity of
Khums in all kinds of income
both have been answered.
But with his
clearance of the meaning of this
cabbala, cavillers sometimes say
that answer and question in
Hadith are not compatible with
each other and it is like a
cryptogram, while there is
neither a secret nor any doubt
in it.
And
sometimes they say that what the
meaning of “Ma’oona” is?
While in
several cabbalas in chapter of
Khums which Ma’oona has been
mentioned, it has been affirmed
that the meaning of Ma’oona is
the costs of living of a person;
moreover surely the costs of
business is not considered
because the sentence “ ما یستفید
الرّجل” (anything which a man
uses) means net profit, and
surely net profit achieves after
subtracting the costs of
business.
And
sometimes they say that what the
meaning of “الضّروب” is? It
seems that they had no knowledge
about the word that “الضّروب”
means kinds and here it means
kinds of businesses and
industries and jobs.
It is
interesting that is some of next
Ahadith they had made another
excuse which is for present
Imam, but explicitness of above
Hadith in generality of the
ruling is so much that they did
not dare to arise this objection
for this Hadith.
2- Abu Ali
ibn Rashid who had been one of
deputies of Imam Javad (a.s.)
and Imam Hadi (a.s.) says:
قلت له امرتنى بالقیام بامرک و
اخذ حقّک فاعلمت موالیک بذلک فقال
لى بعضهم واىّ شىء حقّه؟ فلم
ادرما اجیبه، فقال یجب علیهم
الخمس، فقلت ففى اىّ شىء؟ فقال فى
امتعتهم و صنایعهم، قلت و التّاجر
علیه و الصّانع بیده، فقال اذا
امکنهم بعد مؤونتهم.
I told
him (Imam (a.s.)) you have
ordered me to manage your tasks,
and take your right; I told this
to your friends, some of them
said: what is the right of Imam?
I didn’t know what to say. Imam
(a.s.) said Khums is obligatory
for them, I said in what thing?
He said in goods and products, I
said persons who do business and
build something with their
hands? He said yes if after
paying costs of living any
possibility remains for them.
Cavilers
animadvert to this Hadith with
all explicitness that it have;
sometimes they say that this
Hadith is pronominal (Muzmara)
it means that the name of Imam
has not been mentioned
explicitly and it has been
expressed only by pronoun.
And
sometimes they say how it is
possible that existence of such
a right had been hidden from
deputy of Imam and his Shiites;
but the answer for both
objections of cavilers is clear,
because moreover that “Abu Ali
ibn Rashid” had been the deputy
and one of exclusive agents of
ninth and tenth Imam (a.s.),
when such a person says that I
wrote him that you have ordered
me to take your right, there is
no doubt that the addressee of
the letter had been surely Imam
(a.s.).
And it is
amazing that these cavilers have
expressed explicitly the
deputation of forenamed person
from Imam (a.s.), but because
obstinate persons are forgetful
like liars, they had denied the
matter completely in some lines
after that.
Furthermore,
content of cabbala testifies
that the addressee of this
letter could not be any person
other than Imam (a.s.), because
what right can ordinary people
have on goods, products and
wages of people?
Is it
possible that someone other than
Imam (a.s.) have such a right?
But when a person wants to be
obstinate he can deny the
sunlight of the day and darkness
of the night.
And the
reason for the matter how is it
possible that deputy and
companions of Imam (a.s.) do not
know about the quality of this
issue is clear.
Because as
we will explain completely
later, in some times which
Shiite were under the pressure
Imams (a.s.) forgave the Khums
or part of it and practically
Khums had forgot for a period of
time, therefore when conditions
were normal and Khums had to be
taken, lots of Shiites were
uninformed about the quality of
that and it is not a strange or
unusual matter.
Also today,
there are lots of people who
have not enough knowledge about
the issues of the Khums, even
oppositions who object this much
about that have limited
information about Khums.
3-
کتب الیه ابراهیم بن محمّد
الهمدانى اقرأنى على کتاب ابیک
فیمـا اوجبه على اصحاب الضّیاع
انه اوجب علیهم نصف السّدس بعد
المؤونة، بانّه لیس على من لم یقم
ضیعته بمؤونته نصف السّدس، و
لاغیر ذلک، فاختلف من قبلنا فى
ذلک فقالوا: یجب على الضّیاع
الخمس بعد المؤونة، مؤونة الضّیعة
و خراجها، لا مؤونة الرّجل و
عیاله فکتب: و قرء على بن مهزیار
علیه الخمس بعد مؤونته و مؤونة
عیاله و بعد خراج السّلطان
Ibrahim
ibn Muhammad Hamedani wrote to
Imam (a.s.) that: Ali (Ibn
Mahzyar) read the letter of your
father for me that it had been
ordered in the letter that
owners of water and land should
pay one twelfth of their income
after subtracting their costs to
his holiness, but persons who
their water and estates do not
suffice their costs, this is not
obligatory for them, neither one
twelfth nor other than that;
people who are here with me have
disagreement and discussion
about this matter, they say that
Khums of income is obligatory on
water and land, and this is
after subtracting the costs of
water and land themselves and
their tribute, not the costs of
person himself and his wife and
children.
“Imam wrote
his answer and Ali ibn Mahzyar
also saw the letter that, Khums
is necessary for this person
after subtracting the cost of
living of him and his wife and
children and after subtracting
the tribute of government”.
It has been
ordered explicitly in this
Hadith which its evidence is
completely reliable that people
have to pat the Khums from
surplus of their income from
lands after subtracting the
costs of living and as you see
former Imam (a.s.) had not taken
more than one twelfth, according
to what we said before, because
some of Imams (a.s.) forgave all
or a part of Khums to Shiites
due to conditions of their time
in order that Shiites not be
under pressure.
4- Two of
reliable Hadith tellers “Ahmad
ibn Muhammad” and “Abdullah ibn
Muhammad” quote from Ali ibn
Mahzyar who was one of deputies
of Imam Javad and Imam Hadi
(a.s.) that ninth Imam, Imam
Javad (a.s.), had been wrote to
him in a letter, and we read
this letter in the way to Mecca,
that:
“The thing
which I necessitate only in this
year, year 220, by the reason
which I do not want to explain
in order not to be broadcasted
and Allah willing I will explain
some of that for you in near
future, is that my friends whom
I ask for their expedience from
Allah or some of them have
failed to do their obligatory
duty, I knew that and I wanted
to purify them with the thing
which I had done this year in
Khums; almighty Allah has said
that take alms from their assets
and purify them by that and pray
for them, that your pray is the
cause of their peace and Allah
is hearing and wise.
Don’t they
know that Allah is who accepts
repentance from their servants
and takes alms from him and
Allah is acceptor of repentance
and merciful, and say (prophet)
act and Allah and his prophet
and believer will soon see your
act and soon you will return to
whom that is informed about
hidden and apparent and informs
you about what you have done.
But I did
not necessitate this matter for
them every year and I do not
necessitate other than Zakat
which Allah has necessitated for
them, and only this year I
necessitated Khums in gold and
silver which one year have past
on them, but I did not
necessitate that in living
appliance and dish and
four-footed animals and servants
and not in benefit of business
and not in agricultural land,
except the land that I will
explain for you and this is a
kind of rebate from me for my
friends and forgiveness about
them in change of those which
Sultan depredates from their
assets.
But Khums is
obligatory in advantages and
benefits every year, Allah says
know that anything that you take
as an advantage, one fifth
(Khums) of that is for Allah and
Prophet and close persons
(Sadat; pl. of Sayyid and
Sayyida) and orphans and needed
persons and suspended travelers;
if you have believed on Allah
and what we had descended to our
servant on the day of
distinction (day of battle of
Badr), the day that two armies
confronted (and army of Islam
won), and Allah has powerful
over all things.
But
advantages and benefits, may god
bless you, are incomes which a
person gains and benefits that
he takes and considerable prize
that some people give a person
and heritage that he had not
expected except from father or
child and also like an enemy who
surrenders and his assets is
taken, and also an amount of
money that is found and its
owner is unknown and all that
have reached my friends from the
assets of debauchee Khorramian
Tribe:
Because I
had informed that great amount
of assets had been reached to a
group of my friends, anyone who
has something from those assets
give it to my deputy, and anyone
who is away tries to send it
although after a while (it
reaches) because the intention
of believer is better than his
act.
But the
thing that I necessitate from
agricultural land and cereals is
half of one sixth (one twelfth)
from persons who their
agricultural income covers their
costs, but a person who his
agricultural income does not
cover his costs half of one
sixth is not upon him and
nothing other than that”.
Some matters
are understood from this Hadith:
First is the
necessity of Khums in all
benefits and incomes, and
compatibility of verse of
advantage (غنیمت) with that and
interpretation of advantage
(غنیمت) in its vast meaning that
means any kind of income which
has been mentioned below the
Hadith.
Another one
is the necessity of an
extraordinary Islamic tax equal
to Khums for a specific year,
the year 220 h.gh., because of
extraordinary conditions that
have happened for Imam and
Shiites, and as it is understood
from history (and also a Hadith
which has been mentioned in
Kafi) it was the same year that
Mu’tasim had invited his
holiness to Baghdad and kept his
eyes on his holiness
respectfully. Surely, in that
year Imam and Shiites of Baghdad
had extraordinary condition and
Imam had to organize the
conditions of Shiite needed
people and specially Shiites of
Bani Hashim, and he had no
choice other than taking this
extraordinary Khums from them.
This matter
is not exclusive to Imam, and if
conditions are too much hard
that Khums does not suffice the
costs, governor can raise the
tax for rich people in order to
save the benefits of Muslims,
also it is possible that Zakat
which answers to all needs in
ordinary conditions according to
explicit cabbalas could not
suffice alone; for example when
all Muslims were in danger of
attack of enemies and Islamic
armies need more money, at this
time Islamic governors can ask
for extraordinary amounts of
money for solving the problem,
as an Islamic necessity.
It is
interesting that Imam had
necessitated this extraordinary
tax on gold and silver which one
year had passed them.
People who
are familiar with Islamic Fiqh
and especially Shiite Fiqh and
had studied the authorities of
governor know that Islamic
government or its governor had
special authorities for these
conditions.
Therefore,
this extraordinary Khums which
had been temporary has no
relation with general ruling of
Khums on incomes.
But
obstinate caviler who has no
knowledge about this matter had
been amazed that how it is
possible to take two kinds of
Khums from people, unaware that
one of them is the permanent law
of Islam and the other is
temporary ruling and related to
authorities of Islamic governor,
and according to what had been
said there is no doubt remaining
about the meaning of Hadith.
And it is
interesting that obstinate
caviler has arisen several
objections to this Hadith which
any of them is more amazing than
the other and is the sign of
extremity of his honesty and
vastness of his knowledge and
impartiality and integrity (?)!!
Now pay
attention to some of their
samples:
1- He says
that Hadith tellers who had
quoted from Ali ibn Mahzyar are
unknown persons and are not
famous in Rijal books.
While “Ahmad
ibn Muhammad” who is one of
these two Hadith tellers (and
even without any need to another
Hadith teller the evidence and
document of this Hadith is
compete, because both two teller
have quoted the Hadith from Ali
ibn Mahzyar horizontally) is
“Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Isa” who
is one of most famous persons of
Shiite Rijal and is from
reliable, famous and accredited
persons and his name has been
mentioned in all Rijal books.
But maybe
caviler never had referred to
Rijal books about this matter
and has shot a bullet in the
darkness with the hope that
people have no time for
referring to Rijal books and his
lie will never been revealed or
he referred but did not
understand and idiomatically he
has mistaken deliberately.
The reason
for that “Ahmad ibn Muhammad” is
the same as “Ahmad ibn Muhammad
ibn Eisa” is that the person who
quoted from him is “Muhammad ibn
Hassan Saffar” the author of the
famous book “Basa’ir Al-Darajat”,
and we know that Muhammad ibn
Hassan Saffar is one of students
of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Eisa.
He says: It
has been mentioned in Hadith
that lots of assets of “Khorramian”
had been gained by companions of
Imam, while final defeat of them
had happened in the year 221,
one year after the date which
has been mentioned in this
Hadith and “Babak Khorram-Din”
the dynast of “Khorramian” had
been defeated after the year
221.
We don’t
know that if he had thought that
nobody knows about the history
of Khorramian? And nobody will
refer to history?
We read
in Tabari history that in this
year lots of people of Iran
converted to the faith of Babak
Khorram-Din, and Mu’tasim Abbasi
sent a great army to them, and
in the same year sixty thousand
of followers of Babak had been
killed, and the others escaped
to the Roman countries.
It is
interesting that caviler quotes
explicitly from Tabari history
in his text about the incidents
of “the year 219”, that
commander of an army which had
been sent from Baghdad to
repress Khorramian, “entered
Baghdad with a number of
captives of Khorramian in 11th
of Jamada El Oula of the year
219 and it is said that one
thousands of them had been
killed”.
Obviously in
such a battle with this number
of killed people lots of spoils
had been gained by worriers and
we cannot ignore this truth even
we act like people who know
nothing about that.
The text
that mentioned before is not
exclusive to Tabari history, but
also the same expression has
been mentioned in complete
history of Ibn Athir that: “Ishaq
ibn Ibrahim (commander of army
of Baghdad) entered Baghdad with a
large number of
captives of Khorramian in Jamada
El Oula”. (Notice
that it has been emphasized on
the phrase “a large number”.)
And we know
that in that time they sold the
infidel war captives as slaves
or freed them by taking ransom
and naturally lots of money had
been gained by people of Baghdad
in this way.
More
amazing is that it has been
written in the dictionary of
Dehkhoda under the word “Babak
Khorram-Din” quoted from “the
selected of Hamdullah Mostofi”
that: “Ishaq ibn Ibrahim entered
Baghdad in Jamada El Oula and
there were a large group of
Khorram-Dinan captives with
him”.
And while
caviler had Dehkhoda dictionary
in his hands by testify of his
explicit words, but he acted as
he is deaf and did not pay any
attention to these explicit
evidences that show lots of
assets had gained by Muslims as
spoils from “Khorram-Dinan”
before the year 220. (Damn
obstinacy! That what results it
has!)
By the way,
this objection to Hadith of Ali
ibn Mahzyar is more instable
than cobweb.
3- He says
that how Imam Javad (a.s.) could
have connection with his friends
and send them letters when he
was under observation in
Baghdad?
But maybe he
has forgotten that Imam Javad
(a.s.) had acme to Baghdad by
invitation of Mu’tasim, he was
neither in prison nor so much
limited that cannot contact
people, as this matter has been
affirmed in “Mir’at Al-Oqool”,
vol. 6, page 95.
We read
about Imam Hassan Askari (a.s.)
who was under strong observation
in Samarra that he was partly in
touch with his friends by
letters, and surely violence of
Mutawakkil Abbasi about Imam
Askari (a.s.) was harsher than
severity of Mu’tasim about Imam
Javad (a.s.).
We read in
the book “Rijal Kashi” that:
“Imam Askari (a.s.) wrote a
letter to Ishaq ibn Ismael and
expressed lots of matters in
that letter”.
And we read
in the book “History of Qom”
that “Ahmad ibn Ishaq” went to
Samarra in pilgrimage of Hajj
and went to Imam Hassan Askari
(a.s.).
Therefore,
being under observation of those
superiors had never prevented
them from contacting with
people.
Moreover, if
Imam Javad (a.s.) had been in
conditions that could not write
letter to Shiites, how could Ali
ibn Mahzyar dare to say, in the
same date, such a false
statement that everyone knew
about it?
4- Another
objection that he made, in his
assumption, to Hadith is that
how could Imam legislate and say
that I ordain an extra Khums on
you in that special year, while
we know that legislation is only
exclusive to Allah and Prophet
(S) can only announce that and
the duty of Imam (a.s.) is to
maintain and propagate the
religion, not legislation or
canonization and making new
laws.
But this
caviler has forgotten a clear
point because of his limited
knowledge that there are lots of
differences between
“legislation” and “order of
governor”; Islamic government
and the leader of this
government [Imam (a.s.)] have
the right to issue special
orders temporarily in
extraordinary cases, and order
all people to perform a special
duty, consisting of financial or
non-financial matters, or
prohibit a Halaal (permitted)
matter temporarily for some
special goals; this authority is
not only exclusive to Imam
(a.s.) and Faqihs and religious
governors also have this right,
and the extraordinary conditions
of prohibiting tobacco by
Ayatollah Shirazi, in that
special conditions that the goal
of this order was to fight
economical corruption of
Britain, is one of its example’
and this is one of the signs of
motivity and formative
attributes and liveliness of
Islamic laws that had gave such
authorities to Islamic
government and religious
governors for special and
emergency conditions and
therefore as soon as that
extraordinary condition is
ended, that order also
invalidates and it is not like
main laws of Islam which are
eternal and infinite.
Accordingly,
we see that Imam (a.s.) says
about the first Khums: “This is
exclusive for this year and it
has a reason which I do not want
to explain because of some
conditions. (Surely, this is the
extraordinary condition which
has happened for Shiites about
financial issues by entering
Imam to Baghdad)”. But he says
about the second Khums: “This
law is forever and Muslims
should pay it every year”. It
was so good that this caviler
did not go to judge alone, And
at least contacted with a
knowledgeable person to hear the
answers of his question, in
order not to waste the time of
himself and the others.
From this
matter it clears that why Imam
(a.s.) had necessitated the
first Khums which had been
extraordinary in gold and silver
which one year had past them.
Because as we said issuing this
ruling was by using the
authorities of religious
governor and this should follow
the amount of needs.
Imam had
observed that the extraordinary
need which had happened to
Shiites had been covered by this
much of Khums; therefore he had
limited that to this amount.
More funny
of all is that this caviler has
assumed that there is a
contradiction between beginning
and the end of this cabbala, in
the beginning he says that I
take Khums only from gold and
silver and at the end he denies
his words.
While there
is no contradiction, the only
problem here is the ignorance of
caviler, because as we said
before that Khums in the
beginning of cabbala is
temporary and extraordinary and
had issued by the authorities of
religious governor and another
Khums is at the end of cabbala
is one of permanent and eternal
Islamic laws.
And if we
see that he had referred to the
verse of advantage in the second
part, it is according to the
same reason.
More
amazingly, Imam has interpreted
advantage ( غنیمت) clearly by
its vast meaning, and has known
it consisting of all incomes,
but again caviler has acted as
he is completely deaf and has
ignored all of that.
*******************************
Another
objection or we should better
say excuse, which has been said
about this Hadith and it is
another evidence of
insufficiency of caviler’s
knowledge is that he says: “Imam
Javad (a.s.) had past away in
the year 219, how it is possible
that he had issues this order in
the year 220 as it has been
mentioned in the text of
Hadith?”
The answer
to this objection clears by
referring to famous historical
texts of Shi’aa and famous
Hadith books, because “Sheikh
Mufid” affirms in the book “Irshad”
in hagiography of Imam Javad
(a.s.) that his holiness had
past away in the year 220.
It is
written in the book “Usul
Al-Kafi”:
ولد فى شهر رمضان من سنة 195 و
قبض فى سنة 220 فى آخر ذى القعدة
He was
born in Ramadan in the year 195
and past away in ends of Zul
Qa"da the year 220.
And it is
written in the book “Kashf Al-Qumma”
that, his holiness went to
Baghdad in the year 220 and he
passed away in ends of Zul Qa’da
in the same year.
And
according to the quote of the
book “Muntakhab” from the books
“Doroos” and “A’lam Al-Wara” and
“Managheb” and “Ithbat Al-Wasiyyat”
by Mas’oodi, all these books
have mentioned the year 220 as
the date of departure of his
holiness and also his departure
has been mentioned the year 220
in the book “Wafiyat Al-A’yan”
and expressing the date of
departure of his holiness in the
year 219 considers as a weak
evidenced expression.
The year of
departure of his holiness also
has been mentioned the year 220
in the book “Tarikh Mawaleed and
Wafiyat Ahlul Bayt Al-Nabi” by
“Ibn Khashab” (according to the
quote of Bahar).
Therefore, it is strongly logical that we say his holiness has
past away in the ends of the
year 220, and few months before
had issued that order.
Indeed it is amazing that as person ignores all of these famous
books and only refers to a weak
cabbala that expresses the date
of departure of his holiness in
the year 219; could this act
have a reason other than
ignorance or evil intention?!
***
It clears from the things which
we said that the cabbala of “Ali
ibn Mahzyar” is one of cabbalas
that has no place for objection
about its evidence or
implication, and objections
which have arisen about this
mostly have been due to lack of
knowledge or obstinacy and
partiality.
***
5- Another cabbala which is considerable about the evidence and
also implication and proves
Khums in all incomes is the
cabbala of “Sama’a ibn Mehran”
from Imam “Mousa ibn Ja’far”
(a.s.):
قال سألت ابالحسن عن الخمس فقال
فى کلّ ما افاد النّاس من قلیل او
کثیر
I asked Imam Mousa ibn Ja’far about Khums; he said Khums is all
benefits that people gain from
little to many.
But unfortunately that caviler assumed that he can invalidate
this Hadith by delusive
objections:
Sometimes he says that Sama’a had past away in the time of Imam
Sadiq (a.s.) and how could he
quote a Hadith from Imam Mousa
ibn Ja’far (a.s.).
While scholars of Rijal have affirmed that he has quoted several
cabbalas from Imam Mousa ibn
Ja’far (a.s.) and today these
cabbalas are available in our
Hadith books.
Moreover, scholars of Rijal said that “Sama’a” had been Vaghefi
beside his truthfulness and
reliability; it means that he
was one of persons who had
stopped about leadership after
Imam Mousa ibn Ja’far (a.s.),
how it is possible that a person
to be Vaghefi and die in the
time of Imam Sadiq (a.s.)? It is
funny that caviler himself has
confessed that Sama’a had been
Vaghefi and still says that he
had died in the time of Imam
Sadiq (a.s.).
Maybe he didn’t notice the meaning of the word Vaghefi, unless
how it is possible that a person
expression such a contradiction?
Yes, it is said in a weak cabbala that Sama’a had past away in
the time of Imam Sadiq (a.s.)
but as the late Allame Ardabili
has written in the book “Jame’
Al-Rovat” in the biography of
Sama’a this cabbala is from
fabricated ones.
But if maybe there is no expression more explicit than this
cabbala in implication about the
generality of Khums, this
caviler says:
“Asker had asked Imam from Khums, it is not clear that which kind
of Khums he had asked about; is
it from spoils that people
should pay its Khums from
anything that they gain or is it
the Khums of mines and treasures
and diving into the sea and like
them, or benefits of businesses
and industries”.
But while the word “Khums” has been mentioned in question in its
definite way and Imam has said
in the answer explicitly that
Khums is obligatory in all the
things that gives benefit to
people from little to many, we
do not know that where could
this person find these baseless
possibilities, and how he
connected them to this Hadith
and he did not thought that if
anyone see his writing, that
person will blame him for this
obstinacy.
|