Why Prophet Muhammad Did Not Have a Wasi



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?


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.

Article Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com

Chiite.fr | Email : ahlelbayt[a]live.fr | English Version