Why Prophet Muhammad Did Not Have a Wasi
Jamadi-us-Sani 29, 1431 A.H, Sunday, June 13, 2010
Question:
A Shia person wrote:
Every Rasool (Messenger) sent by Allah had a Wasi: the Wasi
of Prophet Ibrahim was Prophet Ismaeel, and the Wasi of
Prophet Moosa was Prophet Haroon, etc. How is it then that
the best of them, Prophet Muhammad, was not given a Wasi?
End quote.
What is our response to this?
Answer:
The word “Wasi” refers to successor/legatee.
One Messenger succeeded another Messenger. Prophet Adam was
the first Messenger, and after him, Allah sent another
Messenger, and after him then Allah sent another, and after
him then Allah sent another, etc. This process continued up
until Prophet Muhammad who was the last of the Prophets and
no divinely appointed figure succeeded him. How can the
Prophet be succeeded when the Quran itself testifies that
the Prophet is the final seal of the divinely appointed
Messengers?
The Shia give the example of Prophet Ibrahim and Prophet
Ismaeel; do they not know that both of these are Prophets?
The same is the case with Prophet Moosa and Prophet Haroon.
In essence, the Shia are asking us: if all the Messengers
had Messengers that came after them, then why didn’t the
best of them have a Messenger after him?
The answer therefore is that Prophet Muhammad was without a
doubt the best of them and this is why there is no divinely
appointed figure after him. Indeed, the fact that the Shia
believe in this–and the manner in which they exalt this
position of Wasi–is why we call them to be disbelievers
outside the folds of Islam. After the death of the Prophet,
there were many groups of people who claimed that there were
divinely appointed figures after Prophet Muhammad, but these
groups of people became disbelievers and enemies of Islam.
We believe in the Shahadah of the Muslims which is:
There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his (Last)
Messenger.
It seems that the Shia propagandists are using a point that
goes against them! They seek to score a polemical point by
using this “Wasi” argument, but in reality it is the
damnation of their entire sect. Those who believe in
divinely appointed figures after Prophet Muhammad have
become disbelievers by disbelieving in the finality of the
Prophethood. Therefore, the one who claims that the Prophet
had a Wasi and who exalts this position in the manner the
Shia do is a disbeliever. The Prophet does not have any such
thing as a “Wasi” because he is the last Messenger and
nobody came after him.
It should also be noted that the concept that “every
Messenger had a Wasi” is simply false; the Shia have simply
named two Messengers who were alive at the time of two other
Messengers. Let them back up their claim: there are
twenty-five Messengers mentioned in the Quran; how many of
them had any such “Wasi” and if so what were their names?
Simply naming two Messengers who were coincidentally alive
at the same time as two others, does not at all prove the
Shia’s doctrine. Where in the Quran is the word “Wasi”
mentioned? In fact, the entire concept of “Wasi” is alien to
Islam and it was brought into Islam by the likes of Ibn Saba
whose purpose was to destroy the Finality of Prophethood.
There was no concept of “Wasi” in Islam, and it was Ibn Saba
who brought this blameworthy innovation into the faith of
Islam.
But even if we were to accept the fallacious idea that every
Messenger had a Wasi, then we respond to the Shia by saying
that Prophet Muhammad had no Wasi because he was the final
seal and nobody came after him. The Quran mentions that the
Prophet is the Final Seal, and nowhere does it mention any
Wasi that is to come after him. The one who believes in such
a thing as Wasi and who exalts the position of Wasi over and
above Nubuwwah and Risala is a disbeliever and outside the
folds of Islam. How is that such a fundamental belief of the
Shia is missing from the Quran? If a Wasi was to come after
the Prophet, then surely this would be noteworthy enough to
mention in the Quran! Instead, we find absolutely no mention
of this concept in the Quran and instead it is an invention
of the disbelievers.
What is interesting is that so many of our own Sunni
laypersons get stumped by this question that the Shia
propagandists pose, but in reality the answer is extremely
intuitive and obvious: nobody came after Prophet Muhammad
and he is the last in the divinely appointed figures sent by
Allah. This difference between the mainstream Muslims and
the Shia is actually the crux of the difference between the
two groups: the mainstream Muslims believe in the absolute
finality of Prophethood and feel that the belief in a Wasi
after Prophet Muhammad is therefore blasphemous.