Response to Twelvershia: Did Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn reject Abu Bakr and Umar sitting on the Prophet’s pulpit?
Article being answered:
https://www.twelvershia.net/2016/04/11/response-to-concept-of-ahlubait-regarding-caliphate-of-sheikhain-2-sahih-sunni-chain/
The article tries to refute the narration where Imam Hasan عليه السلام came to Abu Bakr while he was on the pulpit and said:
“Come down from my father’s pulpit.”
Twelvershia’s entire response is built on one point:
The report through Urwah ibn al-Zubayr is mursal because Urwah was born after Abu Bakr’s time.
Fine.
I will not overclaim that specific Hasan–Abu Bakr route as a connected sahih chain.
But here is the problem:
Twelvershia’s response is incomplete, selective, and logically weak.
Why?
Because they attacked the weaker Hasan–Abu Bakr route but ignored the much stronger Husayn–Umar narration, which Sunni sources themselves authenticate.
==============================
1. The Hasan–Abu Bakr report exists in Sunni books
Arabic:
أن أبا بكر خطب يوما، فجاء الحسن فصعد إليه المنبر فقال: انزل عن منبر أبي.
فقال علي: إن هذا لشيء عن غير ملأ منا.
English:
“Abu Bakr gave a sermon one day. al-Hasan came and climbed up to him on the pulpit and said: ‘Come down from my father’s pulpit.’
Ali said: ‘This is something not from any instruction/arrangement from us.’”
Reference:
Ibn Sa‘d, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra.
Also transmitted by al-Baladhuri in Ansab al-Ashraf with similar wording.
Important note:
Yes, this route is mursal because Urwah ibn al-Zubayr did not witness the event.
So we do not need to claim this specific chain is fully connected sahih.
But it is still an early Sunni historical report.
It is not a Shia fabrication.
And more importantly, it is not the only report on this theme.
==============================
2. Ibn Asakir preserves an even more damaging Abu Bakr version
Arabic:
جاء الحسن بن علي إلى أبي بكر وهو على منبر رسول الله، فقال: انزل عن مجلس أبي.
قال: صدقت إنه مجلس أبيك.
ثم أجلسه في حجره ثم بكى.
فقال علي: والله ما هذا عن أمري.
قال: صدقت، والله ما اتهمتك.
English:
“al-Hasan ibn Ali came to Abu Bakr while he was on the pulpit of the Messenger of Allah and said: ‘Come down from my father’s seat.’
Abu Bakr said: ‘You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.’
Then he seated him in his lap and cried.
Ali said: ‘By Allah, this was not by my command.’
Abu Bakr said: ‘You have spoken the truth; by Allah, I did not accuse you.’”
Reference:
Ibn Asakir, Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 30, p. 307.
Online source:
https://lib.eshia.ir/22014/30/307
This is very important.
Twelvershia tries to use Ali’s statement, “I did not command him,” as if Ali was saying Hasan was wrong.
But Abu Bakr himself replies:
صدقت إنه مجلس أبيك
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.”
So Ali denying that he coached Hasan does not mean Hasan was wrong.
It only means Hasan spoke spontaneously.
There is a big difference between:
“I did not teach him this”
and:
“He is wrong.”
Ali did not say:
“This pulpit belongs to Abu Bakr.”
Ali did not say:
“My son is mistaken.”
Ali did not rebuke Hasan.
In the Ibn Asakir version, Abu Bakr himself acknowledges the point.
==============================
3. The stronger narration: Imam Husayn عليه السلام and Umar
This is the narration Twelvershia conveniently ignored.
Arabic:
عن حماد بن زيد، عن يحيى بن سعيد الأنصاري، عن عبيد بن حنين، عن الحسين بن علي رضي الله عنهما قال:
صعدت إلى عمر بن الخطاب المنبر، فقلت له:
انزل عن منبر أبي، واصعد إلى منبر أبيك.
قال: فقال لي: إن أبي لم يكن له منبر.
فلما نزل ذهب بي إلى منزله فقال: أي بني، من علمك هذا؟
قال: قلت: ما علمنيه أحد.
English:
From Hammad ibn Zayd, from Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Ansari, from Ubayd ibn Hunayn, from al-Husayn ibn Ali:
“I climbed up to Umar ibn al-Khattab on the pulpit and said to him:
‘Come down from my father’s pulpit and climb onto your father’s pulpit.’
Umar said to me:
‘My father did not have a pulpit.’
When he came down, he took me to his house and said:
‘My son, who taught you this?’
I said:
‘No one taught me this.’”
Reference:
Narrated by Ibn Sa‘d in al-Tabaqat, Ishaq ibn Rahawayh as quoted in al-Matalib al-Aliyah, al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad, and others.
IslamQA itself quotes this report and says:
Arabic:
وهذا إسناد رواته ثقات.
وقد صحح إسناده الذهبي في سير أعلام النبلاء، وابن حجر في الإصابة.
English:
“Its chain’s narrators are trustworthy.
Its chain was authenticated by al-Dhahabi in Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala and by Ibn Hajar in al-Isabah.”
Reference:
IslamQA:
https://islamqa.info/ar/answers/517680
Dorar also lists the narration and gives Ibn Hajar’s ruling:
Arabic:
خلاصة حكم المحدث: إسناده صحيح
English:
“Ruling: Its chain is sahih.”
Reference:
Dorar:
https://dorar.net/h/a9DlT8kv
This is the real problem for Twelvershia.
They attacked the Hasan–Abu Bakr report because of irsal, but they ignored the Husayn–Umar report whose chain is authenticated by Sunni authorities.
That is not refutation.
That is selective damage control.
==============================
4. “Ali taught him” excuse collapses
The Sunni polemical excuse is:
Maybe Ali taught his children to say this.
But the Husayn–Umar narration destroys this excuse.
Umar asked Husayn:
Arabic:
من علمك هذا؟
English:
“Who taught you this?”
Husayn replied:
Arabic:
ما علمنيه أحد.
English:
“No one taught me this.”
Reference:
IslamQA:
https://islamqa.info/ar/answers/517680
So this was not Ali secretly coaching him.
This was Imam Husayn’s own recognition.
He knew that the pulpit belonged to the Prophet’s household, not to Umar’s father.
That makes the report even stronger.
==============================
5. “Ali did not tell him” supports the Shia point, not the Sunni point
Twelvershia says:
Ali did not back up his son.
Wrong.
Ali only denied that he instructed him.
That is not the same as saying:
“My son is wrong.”
If a child speaks truth without being told, and the father says, “I did not tell him to say that,” the father is only denying coaching.
He is not denying the truth of the statement.
In the Ibn Asakir version, Abu Bakr himself says:
Arabic:
صدقت إنه مجلس أبيك.
English:
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.”
So the report does not show that Ali rejected Hasan’s words.
It shows that Hasan spoke independently, and Abu Bakr acknowledged the meaning.
==============================
6. “They were children” is a weak excuse
Some people try to minimize this by saying:
Hasan and Husayn were children.
But Sunni hadith says:
Arabic:
الحسن والحسين سيدا شباب أهل الجنة.
English:
“Hasan and Husayn are the masters of the youth of Paradise.”
Reference:
Sunan al-Tirmidhi, hadith 3768.
al-Tirmidhi said:
Arabic:
هذا حديث حسن صحيح.
English:
“This hadith is hasan sahih.”
Reference:
https://www.islamweb.net/ar/library/content/2/3701
Dorar also lists the narration and al-Albani’s ruling as sahih:
https://dorar.net/hadith/sharh/36297
So do not reduce Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn to “ordinary children.”
They were the Prophet’s grandsons.
They were raised in the house of revelation.
They are the masters of the youth of Paradise.
Their moral and spiritual recognition matters.
If Imam Husayn publicly objected to Umar sitting on the Prophet’s pulpit, that is not something to laugh off as childish talk.
==============================
7. Umar’s own reaction shows Husayn was not treated as wrong
In the authenticated Husayn report, Umar did not say:
“Be quiet, this is my rightful pulpit.”
He said:
Arabic:
إن أبي لم يكن له منبر.
English:
“My father did not have a pulpit.”
Then later Umar honored Husayn and said:
Arabic:
أنت أحق بالإذن من عبد الله بن عمر.
إنما أنبت في رؤوسنا ما ترى: الله، ثم أنتم.
English:
“You have more right to be granted permission than Abdullah ibn Umar.
What you see growing on our heads was only caused by Allah, then you.”
Reference:
IslamQA:
https://islamqa.info/ar/answers/517680
Even IslamQA explains this as acknowledging the right and honor of Ahl al-Bayt because guidance and light came from their house through the Prophet.
Arabic:
بيان أن لأهل البيت حقا عليه؛ لأن من بيتهم خرج الهدى والنور بمبعث النبي.
English:
“This clarifies that Ahl al-Bayt have a right over him, because from their house came guidance and light through the mission of the Prophet.”
Reference:
IslamQA:
https://islamqa.info/ar/answers/517680
So even Sunni apologetic sources admit the report reflects the special right of Ahl al-Bayt.
Then why should it be strange that Hasan and Husayn objected to others occupying the Prophet’s pulpit?
==============================
8. What does this prove?
This narration alone does not prove the entire doctrine of Imamate.
Nobody needs to overclaim.
But it does prove something important:
Hasan and Husayn did not naturally view Abu Bakr and Umar sitting on the Prophet’s pulpit as normal.
They publicly challenged it.
Hasan said to Abu Bakr:
“Come down from my father’s pulpit.”
Husayn said to Umar:
“Come down from my father’s pulpit and climb onto your father’s pulpit.”
Husayn said:
“No one taught me this.”
And Abu Bakr, in Ibn Asakir’s version, said:
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.”
This shows that the Ahl al-Bayt’s own instinct was not to normalize the political occupation of the Prophet’s pulpit.
==============================
9. Twelvershia’s refutation is incomplete
Twelvershia only discussed the Hasan–Abu Bakr route through Urwah.
They did not mention the authenticated Husayn–Umar narration.
They did not mention that IslamQA admits its narrators are trustworthy.
They did not mention that al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar authenticated it.
They did not mention Dorar listing Ibn Hajar’s ruling as:
إسناده صحيح
“Its chain is sahih.”
That is selective.
If you are going to refute the concept of Ahl al-Bayt regarding the caliphate of the Sheikhayn, then you cannot ignore the strongest narration on the same theme.
==============================
10. Twelvershia’s refutation is selective
They use Ali’s statement:
“I did not command him.”
But they ignore Abu Bakr’s statement in Ibn Asakir:
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.”
They attack the mursal Hasan report.
But they ignore the authenticated Husayn report.
They dismiss the objection as childish.
But they ignore the Sunni hadith that Hasan and Husayn are the masters of the youth of Paradise.
This is not balanced research.
This is cherry-picking.
==============================
11. Twelvershia’s refutation is logically weak
Their logic is:
If Ali did not teach Hasan, then Hasan’s statement has no value.
But the opposite is true.
If Ali did not teach Hasan, then Hasan’s objection was spontaneous.
And in the Husayn report, Husayn explicitly says:
“No one taught me this.”
That means the objection came naturally from the Prophet’s household.
Also, if the caliphs were clearly rightful occupants of the Prophet’s pulpit, why did Abu Bakr say:
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat”?
Why did Umar not rebuke Husayn?
Why did Umar ask who taught him?
Why did Husayn reply that nobody taught him?
Why did IslamQA admit the chain is trustworthy and authenticated?
These questions are not answered by Twelvershia.
==============================
Final response
Twelvershia’s article fails.
It is incomplete because it ignores the authenticated Husayn–Umar narration.
It is selective because it attacks the weaker Hasan–Abu Bakr route while hiding the stronger Sunni-authenticated report.
It is logically weak because Ali denying that he coached his son does not mean his son was wrong.
It is also disrespectful to reduce Hasan and Husayn to meaningless child-talk when Sunni hadith calls them the masters of the youth of Paradise.
The fair conclusion is this:
The Hasan–Abu Bakr report is historically preserved in Sunni sources, though some routes are mursal.
The Ibn Asakir version even has Abu Bakr saying:
“You have spoken the truth; it is your father’s seat.”
The Husayn–Umar report is much stronger.
IslamQA admits its narrators are trustworthy.
al-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar authenticated it.
Dorar lists Ibn Hajar’s ruling as:
إسناده صحيح
“Its chain is sahih.”
And Husayn himself said:
“No one taught me this.”
So the real point remains:
Ahl al-Bayt did not naturally accept others occupying the Prophet’s pulpit as a normal divine right
The leaders of the youth of Paradise publicly objected.
And Twelvershia’s attempt to hide this behind one mursal route is not scholarship.
It is damage control.
Why Did Imam Husayn Tell Umar to Leave the Prophet’s Pulpit?
Primary Category :
Secondary Category :
Loading comments...