In the Name of Allah the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

Imamology, Lesson 17: The opines of the unions of the management on the analysis of the chastity

Collected Works of The Muslim Shiite Scholar and Thinker: Allāma Hājj Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Husaynī Tihrānī


         Home Page Book List Subject Catalog Search


Lesson Seventeen: The opines of the unions of the management on the analysis of the chastity


In the Name of Allah, the most Compassionate, the most Merciful

And bless be upon Muhammad and his pure Heousehold, and may Allah's curse be on his enemies from now until the Day of Resurrection! And there is no power or strength except for the Lofty Glorious Allah.


The Wise Allah has stated in His Glorious Book:


يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَطِيعُواْ اللّهَ وَأَطِيعُواْ الرَّسُولَ وَأُوْلِي الأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا [1]

'… O you who believe, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. Then if you have any dispute over anything, refer to Allah and the Messenger if you believe in Allah and the Last Day – for that is better and becoming in the end, (Qur’an: 4/59).’


Zamakhshari says:[2] ‘In this verse, the purpose of ‘those in authorities’ or the scholars is the nation or ‘the First Four Caliphs’ in Islam, and ‘Whoever you are following is on the right’, and the commanders. And Siyouti [3] is also thinking so; he has put many narratives in his ‘Commentary Book’, and many other common commentators have followed his opinion. Prior to their claims and suggestions, they have reasoned to the dispute of Am‘mār and Khalid ibn Walid that:

Back to Index

The Story of Khalid and Am'mar dispute and the Sunnite's benefitting from it.

The Holiness Messenger Bless be to him and his Descendants sent Khalid ibn Walid for the concubine and Am‘mār was accompanying them. The army set out for the mission and before approaching the troops they stopped and dismounted their horses; as it was late at night, Khalid ibn Walid decided to attack that tribe the next day morning. That night, Dol-Abinatain reported the tribe of the arrival of Khalid ibn Walid’s army. Therefore, all of them escaped in the darkness except one man who had ordered his wife to pack the furniture, and he alone went to the army of Khalid ibn Walid and asked to see Am‘mār. Some men introduced Am‘mār to him and then he said: ‘O Abal-Yaghzan, I have embraced Islam and have witnessed that “There is no deity save Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and is His worshipper”. And by hearing your arrival here, all my relatives escaped and I am alone here, now, this Islam will support me the next day morning or shall I escape as they did?’

Am‘mār answered him: ‘This belief of yours is enough.’ Then, the man stood up but did not escape. When the morning approached, Khalid commanded to attack and plunder. The army attacked but they found no one except that man, Khalid himself captured the man and took away all his belongings. The news was reported to Am‘mār and he stood up and at once went to Khalid saying: ‘Release this man and leave him on his own because he has embraced Islam and I have given him asylum.’

Khalid said, ‘How are you to give asylum to him?’ It was then, Am‘mār and Khalid abused one another and finally they took their complaint to the Messenger of Allah Bless be to him and his Descendants. The Holiness agreed with Am‘mār and confirmed his asylum giving, but in the mean time, he prohibited Am‘mār to give asylums when he was under the control of a commander. Those two again abused each other in the presence of the Messenger and Khalid said: ‘O the Messenger of Allah, do you let this militated slave abuse me?’ The Holiness said: ‘O Khalid, stop abusing Am‘mār, and do not curse him, in fact, he who abuses Am‘mār Allah abuses him for that, and he who make Am‘mār angry Allah will make him angry, and whoever curses Am‘mār Allah will curse him.’ Next, Am‘mār got angry by Khalid ibn Walid’s deviation and stood up leaving the place. Khalid ibn Walid followed him and grabbed his clothes from behind, and then he asked for his forgiveness and Am‘mār was pleased. It was then Allah sent down the verse above.[4]

They have also related from Abu Harirah saying, ‘The Messenger of Allah Bless be to him and his Descendants said:

من اطاعنى فقد اطاع الله، و من اطاع اميرى فقد اطاعنى، و من عصانى فقد عصى الله، و من عصى اميرى فقد عصانى. [5]

Whoever follows me, certainly he follows Allah, and whoever follows the Emir of mine, he really follows me; and whoever disobeys me, certainly he disobeys Allah, and he who disobeys the Emir of mine, he really disobeys me.” (Ad-Dorr al-Manthoor”, volume 2, page 176).

And he also relates another story that within which “Those in authority” means “The Commanders” – even if they are oppressors and unjust.

As we already discussed it, we believe that the exact meaning of “Those in authority” is “The Infallible [Imams]”, otherwise, it needs the convention of commanding and prohibiting in one single subject which is contrary to logic and common sense; and Fakhr Razi, in his commentary, has confessed it with the same meaning.

But concerning the story of Khalid and Am‘mār, it is obvious that the Holiness has not prohibited Am‘mār not to give asylum to anyone – this sentence is redundant in the story. Perhaps the narrator has deliberately added this sentence so that to be able to compare the verse of “Those in authority” with the necessity of obeying the commanders. The Holiness Messenger of Allah respects the asylum giving of any Muslim, even if he might be a lowly Muslim, let alone Am‘mār who had newly embraced Islam and had confessed the formula of witnesses.

قال رسول الّلهِ في خطبةِ خطبها في مسجد الخيف: بِسمِ الّلهِ الرّحمنِ الرّحيم، نَضَّرَ اللَّهُ عَبْداً سَمِعَ مَقَالَتِي فَوَعَاهَا وَ حَفِظَهَا وَ بَلَّغَهَا مَنْ لَمْ يَسْمَعْهَا فَرُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ غَيْرُ فَقِيهٍ وَ رُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ إِلَى مَنْ هُوَ أَفْقَهُ مِنْهُ ثَلَاثٌ لَا يُغِلُّ عَلَيْهِنَّ قَلْبُ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ إِخْلَاصُ الْعَمَلِ لِلَّهِ وَ النَّصِيحَةُ لِأَئِمَّةِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَ اللُّزُومُ لِجَمَاعَتِهِمْ فَإِنَّ دَعْوَتَهُمْ مُحِيطَةٌ مِنْ وَرَائِهِمْ الْمُومنُونَ إِخْوَةٌ تَتَكَافَأُ دِمَاؤُهُمْ وَ هم يدٌ علي من سواهم، يَسْعَى بِذِمَّتِهِمْ أَدْنَاهُم. [6]

 In one of his sermons, in the Mosque of al-Khaif, the Messenger of Allah Bless be to him and his Descendants said: ‘In the name of Allah the most Compassionate Merciful; succulent slave of God heard my article Vuaaha and saved and did not hear her knock FRP is pregnant jurisprudence jurist and Lord of the holder of jurisprudence to someone who is knowledgeable in three hard and does not tie them to the heart of a Muslim who faithfully Work for him and advice to leaders of the Muslims and necessary for their group, the call from behind Surrounding Moumnon commensurate blood brothers and they are the hands of the others, seeks Odnahm discharged.

And by carefully examining the story of Khalid and Am‘mār it becomes clear that, in this case, Khalid was guilty. If Am‘mār were guilty, then why the Messenger of Allah kept praising him, and also Khalid asked him for his forgiveness?!

In the foregoing narrative, the relationship between “Whoever obeys my Emir, he really obeys Allah” and “Those in authority” is quite all right; the clause “Whoever obeys my Emir, he really obeys Allah” is fair enough, and “Those in authority” are infallible who are at the level of the Messenger of Allah and their obedience is incumbent.

Back to Index

The sophistry of Fakhr Razi's false in the comment of the verse: "Those in authority"

Fakhr Razi has noticed the chastity in “Those in authority” however, as he is reluctant to comment on the infallible Imams, he has naturally wandered. He says: ‘The verse absolutely denotes  the necessity of the obedience of “Those in authority” , and there is no an innocent person, or he is not available, therefore, the sense of “Those in authority” is the people of management from the great and learned men among the nation; and if they have unanimous decisions, certainly the result will be free from error for the innocence is of the Devine chastity. Therefore, the common Four Rules Jurisprudence can be drawn from this verse: “Obey Allah” indicates the argument of the Book, and “Obey the Messenger” denotes the proof of the Messenger of Allah, and “Those in authority” among you, denotes the proof of the assembly; and “If you have a dispute in something, refer to Allah and His Messenger” denotes the proof of the deduction. As the purpose of discussing in the matter is misunderstanding of the Book and the rules and traditions, and it is the assembly that their obedience is incumbent.  In this case, the meaning of rejecting the Book of Allah and the rules and traditions of the Messenger is the same as attaining the rule of that problem from its alike – so this is the deduction. And as he mentions the verse of the proof  in these four specific subjects, if the acclaims that Abu Hanifa believes, and the approval that Malik believes are the same deduction, it is all right, but if it is other than this deduction, then, the verse itself has made its falseness known.

To reason on this subject, he has discussed in detail and finally has said:

‘If someone says that: if the meaning of “Those in authority” is the board of management, then, the opposite of ‘the board of management’ has come in the verse; because the comments on “Those in authority”  are not more than four subjects. First: it means the First Four Caliphs in Islam, the second is the commanders, the third is the learned and the fourth one is whatever has been related by the infallible Imams. Our answer is: ‘The meaning of ‘the board of management’ is the learned among the people who are aware of the problems, corrupts and moral soundness of the society, and their unity and their agreement upon their decisions proves the accuracy of their words; according to the Messenger of Allah’s saying: ‘my people do not unite on the wrong’, therefore, there is no opposition to the third one but the same saying and its correctness is perfect.’

But, with a little more consideration, it becomes clear that he has sophisticated in his deduction and slackly concluded it.

First we say: ‘Let’s suppose that none of the members of the management is innocent, and each of them is apt to make mistakes, so how can the result of a vote be immune and they are free from sins? By the way, if anyone of them is liable to sin then the result of the vote is liable to make mistakes. But off course it is absolutely certain that facts are near than mistakes in an assembly, though this nearness or farness does not change a mistake to the chastity. In this case, the chastity is the product of three causes. First of all, every individual of the management must be innocent; in result the management will be blameless. However, it is obvious that since the demise of the Messenger of Allah, the board of the management has always been outlaw. Fakhr Razi himself has confessed it that it is impossible for Allah to let His obedience be suspended that means: ‘those in authority’ are always present.

The second question is that when each member of the board of management is guilty but the board is sound then the members cannot be innocent, it is wrong to assume that the members are right because of the board. It is because chastity is fact and is considered the true attribution of every individual but the attribution of the management is nominal; and it is impossible to believe that the nominal is the same fact. The true attributions are in need of the outward facts, however, a nominal affair is under the opinion of the respect givers – how often there is misunderstanding between the true attributions and an affair of nominal. The attribution of the management is nominal but it is the individuals who are facts and the essence of it.

The third question is that we say the attribution of chastity belongs neither to the board of the management nor the members of the management, it is but Allah who desires both: the board of the management and the members to be free from errors – as it is the same in the successive narratives. The permit of error is seen in the narrative of every narrative, but in the successive narratives it has been disappeared.

In other words, as a piece of news is liable to be wrong and by repetitive news it gradually proves its rightness, and even there remains no doubt of its error; it is the same with the members of the board of management. The opinion of each member of the board of management may be wrong but by their increase in number and their repetitive suggestions the error gives way to the fact of something. On the basis of this, the Messenger of Allah has said: ‘My nation does not unite in the wrong.’

This consideration is also out of place, because: first of all, this narrative relates that the society does not make mistakes, but it is not that a board of management makes not mistakes! Besides, in which verse or narrative or the book a nation stands for the board of management?

Secondly, this narrative negates the assembly of the nation on the error but not the error on the assembly, there is much different between these two. The fist one means that: all the nation does have unanimous opinions on a certain error, which is the very belief of the Shiite that never is world void of the innocent Imam and nor is the earth void of the Evidence. Therefore, if all nations have unanimous opinions of a single matter, there is certainly an innocent among them and the final decision on that matter will be of that innocent one – and he is Proof.

But the meaning of the second one is that there is no error in their assembly, which is not correct, because according to the anxiety there must be an error in their assembly. But as there is an innocent one among them there is a right speech in their gathering. Therefore, the meaning of the narrative is agreeable with the verses and narratives that relate that the earth is never void of the right religion and the innocent person. As it is stated by the Almighty:

فَإِنْ يَكْفُرْ بِها هؤُلاءِ فَقَدْ وَكَّلْنا بِها قَوْماً لَيْسُوا بِها بِكافِرينَ [7]

‘…so if they disbelieve in it, then We entrust it to the people who do not disbelieve in it, (Qur’an: 6/89).’

And similar to the previous verse:

وَ جَعَلَها كَلِمَةً باقِيَةً في‏ عَقِبِهِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ [8]

‘…and thus, he left that as an enduring word with his posterity so that they might return [to monotheism], (Qur’an: 43/28).’

And also His statement:

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَ إِنَّا لَهُ لَحافِظُونَ [9]

‘…surely We have sent this Reminder, and indeed We are the Protector of it, (Qur’an: 15/9).’


وَ إِنَّهُ لَكِتابٌ عَزيزٌ﴿41 لا يَأْتيهِ الْباطِلُ مِنْ بَيْنِ يَدَيْهِ وَ لا مِنْ خَلْفِهِ [10]

… for indeed it is an exalted Book. No falsehood can ever approach it from either in front of it or behind it, (Qur’an: 41/41-42).’

Of course, this meaning is not related to the nation of the Master of the messengers, but they are successive narratives related by the both sects. It denotes that: the folk of Jews divided into seventy-one sections and all of them, except one, are perishable, and the Jesus’ folk were divided into seventy-two sections and all those, except one, are destructible; and the folk of Muhammad divided into seventy-three sections and all of those are perishable, except one. On the whole, although the authentic of this narrative ‘My nation does not unite in the wrong’ is hard to believe, it might be the word of an innocent. If the purpose is ‘those in authority’ in that case we should say the cause is in their chastity.

By considering it well it can be said that it is within three causes, the first reason is that: Allah’s desire is that the opinion of the board of management to be immune from the errors, even if the opinion of every individual in the management is reliable to sin. It is obvious that this is not the final word, because the board of management is not the holder of the Muslims; such boards of managements have been forever in the town, villages and the cities. Times and again it has been seen that, when sharing their opinions, they have made mistakes and encountered dangers – the history and experience are two witness in this field. Therefore, how can one rely on their chastity and ignore Allah’s will and desire about it.

And secondly we might say: Allah’s will and desire, concerning the Muslims is that the opinions of the boards of managements have been immune from making mistakes among the deceased nations. This is not correct either, because if there were such a privilege for the Muslims against the other nations, it would be away from the Mercifulness of Allah. Allah has always set up an innocent among the board of a management to secure the board from making mistakes – and to act in their daily life as the Qur’an, which is as the scientific life for them. If it were so then the Messenger of Allah would certainly announce it at the stage of the miracles, and he would assigned the quality and the limitation of it. He would make it clear that how the board of management should handle it, and what kind of men should be the members of the management, and how mush or in what way they should come together. Was a board of management enough for a whole nation or each district should have its own assembly. If it were so, then the Qur’an would certainly direct the people how to deal with, and the Messenger of Allah would instruct his followers and let them know its specialty. And it would written if the books and the historian would write about it; and even the companions of the Messenger would ask the quality of it from the Messenger of Allah. What was wrong with them that they asked about the tiniest things such as: tangible, intangible and life and death but only this important one. Concerning this, the Holy Qur’an mentions that:

يَسْئَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْأَهِلَّة [11]

‘…they question you about the phases of the new moon, (Qur’an: 2/189);’


يَسْئَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْأَنْفالِ [12]

‘…they question you about the spoils of war, (Qur’an: 8/1);’


يَسْئَلُونَكَ ما ذا يُنْفِقُونَ [13]

‘…they ask you about what they should spend, (Qur’an:2/215);’


وَ يَسْئَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْمَحيضِ [14]

‘…and they question you about the menstruation, (Qur’an:2/222);’


وَ يَسْئَلُونَكَ عَنِ الْجِبالِ [15]

‘…and they will ask you about the mountains, (Qur’an:20/105);’


وَ يَسْئَلُونَكَ عَنْ ذِي الْقَرْنَيْنِ [16]

‘… and they will question you about ‘Dhul Qarnain (Qur’an:18/83).’

However, apart from these kinds of questions, they did not ask about the Muslims vital subject. Surely it can be said that they did not ask a single question about the board of management, and consequently, like anything else, the opponents’ opinions have affects on them and they have not reached to us. It is because their opinions are not what the nations want, and in that case there is not any opinion against their votes, but those in the board of management wanted such society and they still want so.

And it was necessary that in the seditions and events, which occurred after the demise of the Messenger of Allah, the board of management on the ‘Saqifa Bani Saeda’ and those who pretended to take the Caliphate of the Messenger of Allah, in their dispute, spoke about this assembly, and based their claims according this strange miracle; what happened the ignored everything from the basis? It is so that they have not mentioned even a word in any narratives or the books of history about it – neither the companions nor the followers! It was until centuries after that event that Fakhr Razi came upon this extraordinary miracle, then, he himself got to know of the assembly of Abu Bakr and Omar and Abu Obaida in Saqifa. 

In fact, if we do not take this assembly and also the vote of any individual innocent member of it as a miracle then, after six hundred years, Fakhr Razi’s information about it is absolutely a miracle. Apart from this, he himself has confessed that in all Islam worlds the commentators and the narrators have considered ‘those in authorities’ to be of the Orthodox Caliphs, and the commanders and the learned, and this management, which is opposite of the opinions of the assembly must be one of those four tribes so that in this way to avoid the scattering opinions. Although Siyouti mentions some narratives in his book “Ad-dur al-Manthor”,[17] there exists nothing of the board of in it, but he considers their direct saying absolutely right and, by referring to above verse, he mentions it is necessary to obey them. Therefore, by confessing these four speeches, Fakhr Razi himself has rendered his saying about the board of management and his trying has become useless.

The third question is that we say: the chastity of the board of management cannot be considered as a miracle, but it is in nature that the people have obtained by the instruction of the Qur’an and the Messenger of Allah; because teachings and instructions of the Qur’an and the Messenger of Allah are based on the fact and right method therefore, those who are thought and trained in this school, almost always their votes and opinions are perfect and free from mistakes.

This method is also wrong and is not complete.

Because, first of all, as the perceptions of all people are the same and everyone is liable to make mistakes then how can the votes and opinions of a certain group be perfect and innocent! And since the beginning of Islam which assembly and the board of management has been innocent and free from making mistakes? Those fighting and ongoing disputes which, from the demise of the Messenger of Allah, have been going on among the Muslims; how and from where these false affairs and corruptions, which have ruined the people, have turned up? Many of the assemblies and the boards of management that are established everywhere are alike that of Saqifa Bani Saieda, which in the same way, they are changing the views and getting the results by their own opinions. They not only do not take a single step for the benefit of the people but they plant the seeds of desperate and cruelties in the hearts of helpless nations instead of happiness and bliss!

Back to Index

The crimes of the assigned commanders by the management party

That pure prophetic and the base of the instructions of the Qur’an which were based on the spiritual life, unity, peace and purity, generosity, mercifulness and assisting the poor and guiding the people to the straight path in a very short time changed into a huge tyrannical empire by the Ommiad Caliph in Sham. It was diverted to hatred with so much oppression upon the helpless poor people, the respective Islam gave way to the dictatorship, and the rules of Allah were entirely changed. On the whole, the rules of Allah were banned and the commands of the Qur’an disappeared, the belongings of the people were plundered, there were bloodsheds everywhere and the reverence of Islam was ruined. Then, there were great many crimes during the governorship of Ommiad, Bani Abbas and the next Caliphs; it was so disastrous that it deserves to be called the governorship of ‘the cruel Satan’ than a Divine Governorship. All these events were because of that first board of management. It was they who brought such a miserable situation to the pure innocent people.

The governorship of Ommiad was confirmed and signed by Omar; it was Omar who assigned him as the governor-general for Sham and set him up as an overseer upon the people and their properties. Omar permitted him and signed his luxurious Empire paper and fixed him at that position. All the governorships of Mua‘wiyah then, the governorship of Yazid, Marwan and Abdul Malik were by the permission and the command of Omar. Omar took the caliphate to the council and appointed six members of the board of management upon it, then with the opinion of Abdur-Rahman bin au‘f, Othman dominated the Muslims and their belongings and properties. He shared the nation’s treasuries among his kith and kin and appointed Mua‘wiyah as the governor-general to Sham, and he wrote to his governor-general of his in Egypt to kill Muhammad bin Abi Bakr. In the end, after so much corrupts and crimes, he was killed by the uprising Egyptians.

By Abu Bakr’s personal choice, Omar, who consider himself the sole expert in the board of management, was appointed as Caliph. It was Omar who set the front gate of the Highnesses Siddigha, the wife of Ali, al-Mortaza, the daughter of the Messenger, on fire! And then, with the drawn sword, he brought the rightful great governorship to the mosque and ordered him to swear allegiance; at the presence of the gathering in the mosque, he denied all his superiorities, executorships, caliphate, being a minister, governorship and even his brotherhood.[18] All these disasters are the result of the day of Saqifa which was wrong from the beginning and diverted Islam from its straight path and altered the true history.

Abu Bakr seized Fadak from the Highnesses Zahra, Abu Bakr killed Malik bin Nawira by Khalid ibn Walid; Abu Bakr let Khalid on his own about giving lashes to the adulterers and plundering the properties of the Muslims – he exonerated him.[19] Since then, this kind of exoneration came to exercise by the tyrannical judges and commanders.

It is strange that some ignorant people have written in their books that the governorships of Omar and Abu Bakr were the most simple, and they were the Divine Governorships! This kind of simple governorship, which up-rises against the true Islam and the Great and Main Governorship and also changes the lives of the Muslims, must be feared when it is considered with the governorship of Othman and Mua‘wiyah who were betraying the secrets. Due to their boldness and courage, they let the world know of their crimes and deviation, however, Omar and Abu Bakr, who pretended being the supporters of the Islam and bringing unity among the people, carried out very tyrannical actions and they were really the founder of misery and oppression. By his constant weeping and crying, Abu Bakr took away Fadak from the Highnesses Zahra. He introduced himself as a man of prudent, a real peace maker and impartial. On the day when he went to the mosque and delivered a sermon and introduced himself as the Caliph he made it clear that he was not going to spend anything from the Treasure House for his benefit, and it was so until Omar encouraged him to spend of it for his benefit.[20] One must fear of these kinds of tricks than the coercion of Othman and Mua‘wiyah.

By the way, all these corrupts which lasted for a long time was the result of that innocent vote that, in Fakhr Razi’s opinion, grew from the Saqifa; so, well-done to this Saqifa, and well-done to this chastity!! 

فمرحباً بهذهِ السقيفه و مرحباً بهذهِ العِصمة    

If this “homage paying” was the result of the guiltless votes then why Abu Bakr kept saying: “I needn’t pay homage, leave me on my own”.

لا حاجة لي في بيعتكم اقيلوني [21]

While the Commander of the believers upon him be peace is the reliable witness to this belief as he states in the sermon of Shaghshagheiah:

فَيا عَجَبا بَينا هوَ يَستَقيلها فی حَياته اذ عَقَدَها لآخَرَ بَعدَ وَفاته [22]

It is well understood from the statement of the Highness that he points to Abu Bakr who says: ‘Let me on my own, and resign, and choose Ali in my place’; it was not a surprise if it really was his resignation and the assignment of Ali. Another proof for this is, ‘Leave me on my own, I am not useful for you, and Ali is among you’. While it has been explained by Ghoshchi, who is a Sunnite, he has not blamed this phrase “…and Ali is among you”, and confesses that this saying is from Abu Bakr.

And in the book of “Ih‘ghagh al-Hagh” it has been narrated by Shoshtari that Fazl bin Rozbehan, in answering the ugly affairs of Abu Bakr, while setting the front gate of the Highnesses Zahra upon her be peace on fire said: ‘It has been put in the book of the Sunnite that after Abu Bakr ascending the pulpit said:

اَقيلونی فَلَست بخَيرکم وَعَلی فيکم           

Let me on my own for it is not your benefit while Ali is among you; and also Ibn Hajar, in the “As-Sawaegh al-Mohregha” admits this saying to be of Abu Bakr. [23]

Back to Index

Omar has considered the Assembly of Sagifa an error

And if the ballot of the Saqifa was faithful then why Omar has considered it to be blunder?! [24]

Tabari quotes Omar saying:

ثُمَّ انَّهُ بَلَغَنی اَنَّ قاءلا منکُم يَقول: لَو قَد ماتَ امير المومنين (عمر) بايَعت فُلاناً فلا يَقُرنَ امرَءاً اَن يقول: انَّ بيعَةَ اَبی بکر کانَت فلتة فَقَد کانَت کذالکَ غَيرَ اَنَّ الله وَقی شَرَّها [25]

And Ibn Hisham says:

 ثمّ اِنّه قد بلغني أنّ انّ فلاناً قال: والله لو قد مات عمر بن الخطاب لقد بايعت فلانا ، فلا يغرّنٌ أمرءاً ان يقول: اِنّ بيعت أبي بكرٍ كانت فلتةً فتمّت، وأنّها قد كانت كذالِك اِلّا آنّ الله وقي شرّها. [26]

Then I was reported that one of you says: ‘By Allah, if the commander of the believers (Omar) died I would swear allegiance to so and so and no man would say ‘the pledge of Abu Bakr was void, be aware that it is like that, but Allah protects its evil.

And it is narrated in “Ansab-ul-Ashraf” volume I, page 581 that Omar has clearly mentioned this subject but by replacing the name with the phrase ‘so and so’, he says:

اِنّ عمر قال: بلغني أنّ زبير قلل: عمر بايعنا عليّاً ...

‘Indeed Omar said, Zobair reported me saying: it means if Omar paid homage to Ali

And in the pages 583 – 584 he says:

اِنّ فلاناً و فلاناً قالا: لو قدمات عمر بليعنا علِياً... فمن بايع رجلاً غير ةٍ فأنّهما اهل آن يقتلا، و اِنّي اقسِم بِاللهِ ليكفّنّ الرِّجال او ليقطعنّ أيديهم وأرجلهم وليصلّبنّ في جزوع النّخل ... [27]

 … And in the pages 583-584 he says: the both so and so say: If Omar paid homage to Ali…

 If a man pays homage with consulting it, then they are liable to be killed. And I swear by Allah such people’s hands must be chopped and their feet be lashed with the palm twigs…

And in “Seirat al-Halabeiiah”, volume 3, page 40, narrates: ‘Our Master, Omar said:

اِنّ بيعة ابي بكر فلتة ايّ من غير استعدادٍ ولا مشورةِ كما تقدّم ردّاً علي من بلغه عنه أنّه قال: إذا مات عمر بايعت فلاناً، واللهِ ما كانت بيعة أبي بكر بِمشورةٍ، أابيعته لا تتوقّف علي ذالِك. فغضِب، فلمّا رجع مِن آخِرِ حِجّةٍ حجّها المدينة قال علي المِنبر: قد بلغني أنّ فلاناً قال: واللهِ لو مات عمر ذن الخطّاب لقد بايعت فلاناً، إنِ بيعة أبي بكرٍ كانت فلتةً مِن غيرِ مشورة، فلا يغترّنّ امرؤ أ أن يقول: إنّ بيعة أبي بكر كانت فلتةً، فنعم كانت كذالِك إلّا أنّالله قد وقي شرّها.

If the result of the votes of the board of management is chastity, then Abu Bakr, did not organize an assembly but assigned Omar as the Caliph by his own; so, while Abu Bakr was not innocent how did he become faultless in choosing Omar?

While Talha quarreled with Abu Bakr and considered his choice to be a great mistake, Talha was absolutely of the member of the board of management; comparing the two votes, Abu Bakr’s vote was worthless against Talha’s.                                                                                                                

إِنَّ أَبَابَكرٍ لَمَّا نَصَّ علی عُمَرَ، قَامَ إلیهِ طَلْحَةُ فَقَالَ لَه‌: مَا تَقولُ لِرَبّكَ وَ قَدْ وَلَّيْتَ عَلَيْنا فَظّاً غَلِيظاً؟ قَالَ أَبُوبَكرٍ: فَرَكْتَ لِي‌عَيْنَيْكَ وَ دَلكْتَ لِي‌عَقِبَيْكَ وَ جِئتَني‌تَكُفُّنِي‌عَنْ رَأيي‌وَ تَصُدُّنِي‌عَنْ دِينِي‌؟ أَقُولُ لَهُ إذَا سَأَلِني‌: خَلَّفتُ عَلَيْهِم‌خَيْرَ أَهْلِكَ. [28]

Indeed, when Abu Bakr gave the text about Omar, Talha said to him: What do you say to your Lord, and then it may be rude of us to say so! Abu Bakr said: I overlooked it, but you downcast your eyes and made me change my opinion about my religion! I would tell him if he asked me: I have left them the good of your folk.

And if the result of the voting is based on chastity then why Abdur Rahman Auf swore allegiance with Othman, and chose him as the Caliph while the Muslims were blaming him? Then, after the crimes of Othman were revealed, Abdur Rahman himself kept blaming Othman until Othman sacked him out of Medina.[29]  

On the whole, whatever corruptions happened in the world of Islam was because of the selfishness of some people that, later on, Fakhr Razi tried to cover their crimes and mistakes, and by creating fake narratives along with his invented commentaries he tried to redress them for the Muslims.

The objection of ibn Nowairah to Abu Bakr’s Caliphate

In the case of Nowairah’s assassination, Abu Bakr clearly supported Khalid ibn Walid; he not only avoided lashing him for his adultery with the wife of Malik, but he called him as ‘The Sword of Allah” by saying:

لا اشيم سيفاً سلّه الله علي الكافرين 

No, I am proud he is the sword of Allah drawn against the disbelievers

Malik bin Nowaira was sacrificed for the position of the Governorship. His excessive affection to the Commander of the believers and his belief in Shiite caused him to be killed; and this subject caused the punishment and sin of Khalid to be wiped out.

Malik bin Nowaira Timi Yarbobi was of the chief of Shoj‘an, and the Farsian and the poets and he was great and commander before Islam and the time of ignorance. 

Back to Index

Story of the Malik bin Nowaira and his honour of being at the presence of the Messenger of Allah

The Late Ghazi Noor-ul-llah has said [30] in, and also Mohaddith Ghomi has said in the book of “Fazaeel” [31] that the great and the most dignified Sheikh, Shazan bin Gabraeel Ghomi, about whom Sayyid Fakh‘khar bin Sa‘d Mosav, the tutored of Mohaghghegh Helli has narrated from Bra bin Aazeb who has said: ‘When we were sitting in the presence of the Messenger of Allah, and there were some companions with us, the Chiefs of Bani Tamim, including Malik bin Nowaira, were honoured to be in the presence of the Messenger of Allah. Malik said: ‘O Messenger, please teach me the belief.’ That is, teach me what the belief is:

يا رسول اللهِ علّمني الايمان، فقال له رسول الله: ان تشهد ان لا اله الّا الله، وانّي رسول اللهِ، و تصلّي خمس، و تصوم شهر رمضان، و تؤدّئ الزّكاة، و تحجّ البيت، وتوالئ وصيّ هذا ـ واشاره الئ علي بن ابيطالبٍ ـ و لا تسفك دِماءً و لا تسرِق و لا تخون و لا تأكل مال اليتيمِ و لا تشرب الخمر و تؤمن بشرايعئ و تحلّل حلالئ و تحرّم حرامئ و تعطِئ الحقّ من نفسك الضّعيف و القوئّ و الكبير و الصغير، و عدّ عليهِ شرايِع الاسلامِ.

To his question, the Messenger of Allah said:

‘Belief is witnessing that there is no deity except Allah and also witnessing that my Prophet-hood is by Allah. And establishing your daily five-time prayers, and fasting in the month of Ramadan, and paying the welfare due tax, and going to Hajj Pilgrimage.’ And, (while pointing to Ali Ibn Abī Tālib upon him be peace he said), ‘And not shedding the unlawful blood, not steeling, not betraying, not consuming the property of the orphans, not drinking alcohol. And believing in my commands of laws, and considering lawful whatever I have made legitimate and bearing in mind unlawful what I have branded as illegitimate. And it is, paying the rights of the weak, the mighty, the great or the lowly people back to them.’ And the Holiness counted many different lawful and unlawful laws for him.

Malik was very delighted and, while he was proudly setting out, he said:

تعلّمت وربِّ الكعبه

‘By the Lord of Ka‘ba, I got to know the belief.’

Then, when he was away, the Holiness said [to the gathering]:

من اراد ان ينظر الي رجلٍ من اهل الجنة فلينظر الي هذا الرجل

‘Whoever wants to see a man of paradise let him observe this man.’

Abu Bakr and Omar asked for the permission of the Holiness and went after Malik and asked him: ‘Now that the Messenger of Allah ahs reported that you are one of the dwellers of paradise so we beg you to pray for us.’

Malik answered:                                                                       

  في الحقِّ مبغضةٌ

‘Sometimes, the truth makes someone angry!’ [32]

Back to Index

Malik bin Nowaira's objection to Abu Bakr's guardianship

When the Holiness Messenger of Allah passed away, Malik went to Medina and looked for the Guardian of the Holiness. It was Friday [so he went to the mosque for the Friday prayer], Abu Bakr was in the mosque delivering a sermon. Malik could not bear it so he went closer to Abu Bakr and asked him: ‘Are you not the same [religious] brother of us?’ He answered, ‘Yes, I am.’  Malik said, ‘So where is that Guardian of the Messenger of Allah that the Holiness had enjoined me to follow him?’ The people [in the mosque] said: ‘O you the Bedouin, how often many an evident happens after another evident.’

Malik answered: ‘By Allah, not an evident has occurred but you have proved treacherous to the will of the Messenger of Allah.’ So he turned to Abu Bakr saying: ‘Who has let you ascend this pulpit which the Guardian of the Prophet is sitting here, in the mosque.’ Abu Bakr turned to the gathering and said: ‘Send this basically tramp Bedouin out of the mosque.’ Ghonzof and Khalid ibn Walid beat him and sent him out of the mosque; Malik mounted on his camel, and after uttering ‘Peace be upon Muhammad and his Descendants’ he composed this short poem: 

اطعنا رسول اللهِ ما كان بيننا    فيا قوم ما شأني و شأن ابي بكرٍ

اِذا مات بكرٌ قام بكرٌ مقام      فيلك وبيتِ الله قاصمة الظهرِ

Obeyed we Allah’s Messenger as he was with us, it was our concern, but Abu Bakr’s affair is else; if an elderly dies a newborn rises, that is: Allah’s House is for you catastrophe

Back to Index

Khalid Ibn Walid’s murdering Malik Bin Nowaira and committing adultery with his wife

Before his demise, the Messenger of Allah had appointed Malik as the tax and charity collector of his, but after the demise of the Messenger of Allah he went to Medina and found the Caliphate off the course, and they had altered ‘the will’ of to Abu Bakr’s benefit. Therefore, Malik returned to his people and avoided them sending the taxes and charities of the people to Abu Bakr – he shared them all among his own folk. He says:

فقلت خذوا اموالكم غير خائفٍ     و لا ناظرٍ فيما يجيء مِن الغدٍ

فان قام بالدّينِ المحوّقٍ قائمٌ        اطعنا وقلنا الدّين دين محمّدٍ [33]

Take your properties, (charities), and be not afraid

And expect not any harm may befall you the next day

Then, when the main owner rises against this, now the mixed religion,

We shall follow, and pay the tax and will say: ‘Muhammad’s is the main religion.’

Abu Bakr appointed Khalid ibn Walid to go Butah [34] with an army and to utter the ‘call to pray’ and ‘establish prayer’ with those who he would come across to. He was ordered that if the people prayed, not to fight them, just collect their taxes and donations, however if they avoided paying their taxes then to plunder their belongings without killing anyone; finally, if they resisted uttering ‘the call to pray’ and ‘establishing prayer’ to kill them by setting their houses on fire or anyway seemed possible. [35]

Abu Ghattata, [36] whose real name was Harith, and also Abdullah bin Omar were in the army of Khalid ibn Walid. [37] When the army of Khalid reached Botta, they found no arm forces there, therefore, in the darkness they attacked Bani Yarboo, the folk of Malik, and took them under their control; but only Malik and his relatives took their arms. Khalid and his companions asked them: ‘Why did you arm yourselves?’

Before answering their question, they asked: ‘Then, why have you taken arms?’

Khalid’s group said: ‘But we are Muslims and we never attack.’ They answered: ‘We are also Muslims.’

Khalid’s men said: ‘If you are Muslims, then put your arms aside; we are going to pray and pray too.’ They put their arms aside and began praying. [38] Right then, Khalid commanded to arrest them and kill them all. Malik bin Nowaira said: ‘Why are you killing us? We are Muslims.’

Ghattada and Abdullah bin Omar said: ‘O Khalid, save Malik, do not kill him, he is a Muslim and we saw him praying.’ [39]

Khalid said: ‘No, he must be killed.’

There raised a dispute between Ghattada and Khalid and Ghattada pledged his word with Allah that never join an army of Khalid and not to be under his command. [40]

Malik said: ‘O Khalid, take me to Abu Bakr to pass a judgment between us.’ Khalid said: ‘I will never give you any respite.’ [41]

In the mean time, Khalid caught sight of Malik’s wife, Umm Tamim, who was a beautiful charming woman, and he decided to have affairs with her but after killing her husband, Malik.

Right then, Malik turned to his wife and said: ‘You caused me to be murdered, now I have to die to defend the chastity of yours! [42]

No matter what Malik said, it did not benefit him nor did it touch Khalid. Then, Malik said: ‘O Khalid, you have been sent here for a greater mission while our crime is next to nothing.’ [43]  

Khalid ordered Zerar bin Azwar to behead Malik, and he carried out his order and killed him; [44] in the same night, he went to the bed with his wife, Umm Tamim. [45] In the mean time, he ordered his men to put the heads of the dead men in the ovens for wood to cook food. Malik’s head was very big with the tense bushy hair, so the hair was enough to burn and boil the huge pot. [46] Khalid also ordered to take all the women as captive to Medina and plunder the whole their belongings.

The case was too dear for the Muslims to bear. Omar went to Abu Bakr and said: Khalid has killed the Muslims, he has also killed Malik Nowaira and raped his wife; he has plundered the properties of the Muslims, so you must punish him and give lashes to him for his adultery.’ 

Later on, when Khalid entered the mosque of Medina, he had a robe on with the bits of iron pieces stuck everywhere on it – the arrows had made big holes in it and some of them were hanging as pendulums on his garment. As Omar saw him, he stood up and went closer to him and took away the arrows piercing in his turban, and saying: ‘I am going to kill you, I will stone you to death; did you kill a Muslim and committed adultery with his wife?’

Khalid did not say anything because he thought Omar’s hard words were coming from Abu Bakr. But some later, when Khalid went to Abu Bakr, they discussed mostly about the fighting and then Khalid jumped on the chance and said: ‘the reason for my killing Malik was that he used bad languages in your behind:

 قال لِخالِدٍ و هو يراجِعه: ما اِخال صاحِبكم اِلّا و قد كان يقول كذا و كذا.

He said, Malik told me: ‘I did not leave your Master, Abu Bakr, but only for his saying so and so.’ Khalid continued, then to his expression I said:

اوما تعدّه لك صاحِاً؟

‘Do you not consider Abu Bakr as your Master?’

Therefore, that was why I ordered my man to behead him.

Back to Index

Abu Bakr is defending Khalid’s crimes

Abu Bakr acquitted Khalid of his crimes and he left Abu Bakr cheerfully. [47] Next Omar went to Abu Bakr and said: ‘Khalid has committed adultery so give him the due lashes.’ Abu Bakr said:

لا، لِانّه تأوّل فاخطأ

No, you are mistaking in the explanation.’ Omar said: ‘He has killed a Muslim so you kill him.’ Abu Bakr answered:

­ لا، ِانّه تأوّل فاخطأ

No, you are mistaking in the murdering of Malik. Then, he said: ‘O Omar, I do not sheath the sword that Allah has manifest to them.’

ما کنت لِاغمِد سيفاً سلّه الله عليهِم. [48]

Then, Omar said: ‘O Abu Bakr, depose him of his position.’ To his statement, Abu Bakr said: ‘I do not sheath the sword that Allah has manifest to the disbelievers.’  

لا اغمِد سيفاً شهره الله علی الکفّار. [49]

Malik’s brother, motammam bin Nowaira, went to Medina and asked Abu Bakr for the blood-money of his brother and the release of the captives. Abu Bakr ordered the captured to be released. Again Omar asked Abu Bakr to depose Khalid from his post, added: ‘There is the sign of aggression and the unjustified blood in Khalid’s sword.’ 

اِنّ فی سيفِهِ رهقاً [50]

Abu Bakr said: ‘No, O Omar, I never sheath the sharp sword that Allah has unsheathed for the disbelievers.’  

 لا، يا عمر، لم اکن لِاشيم سيفاً سلّه الله علی الکافِرين. [51]

Abdullah bin Omar and Ghattada went to Omar and stood as the witnesses that Khalid had killed the Muslims, they said: ‘We knew that Malik bin Nowaira was a Muslim, he uttered the call to pray and he stood to say the prayer.’ However, Abu Bakr turned away his face from Ghattada and hated him! [52]

Through his apostasy to Islam, Khalid killed Malik, no matter how much that poor man cried he was a Muslim Khalid said: ‘No, you deserve to be killed. And when he said: ‘The beauty of my wife has caused me to die,’ Khalid said: ‘No, but it is your turning away from Islam.’  

بل رجوعک عنِ الاِسلام [53]

 Although, Malik bin Nowaira, the good character companion, was not a disbeliever but only he had said something unpleasant behind Abu Bakr, and Khalid had carried the words to Abu Bakr, he was murdered and Khalid was freed. Abu Bakr acquitted Khalid, he neither killed him nor gave lashes for his adultery; he even did not use slander against him.

He defended him and called such a lewd adulterer person ‘the effective sharp sword of Allah’. He made him known as Allah’s avenger who had drawn his sword to kill the disbelievers, such as: (Malik bin Nowaira and oppress the wives of the Muslims and plunder their belongings).

Let’s suppose that Malik kept away from paying his due tax, then, is it right to kill him? Malik abstained paying taxes to Abu Bakr but not to the Heir of the Messenger of Allah; as it is clear through his poem that he was a real Muslim, then, is it permissible to kill a Muslim?

Let’s suppose that by disobeying Abu Bakr he was considered as an apostate, so what about his wife? Was it right to commit adultery with a Muslim woman? Then, how can it be explained! Are the explanations of Abdullah bin Omar and Ghattata not enough for his faultlessness who were witnessing the event? Why did Abu Bakr not take their words serious and in the mean time he hated them and did not believe them as the witnesses? Was it not because Khalid was his support in the governorship?

Abu ordered his men to pay the blood-money for Malik and free the captive go. So is it right to take Abu Bakr as a right and innocent member of ‘those in authorities’? In fact, those such as Fakhr Razi who tried to interpret the events, such as Malik, to look flawless, committed sins and became their partners in the crimes. It was astonishing what Abu Bakr said. Was the sword of Khalid really the Sword of Allah which was in his hand unsheathed?! 

Omar says: 

اِنّ في سيفِهِ رهقا  

There is injustice and unjust blood-shedding in Khalid’s sword!

So are these violations and oppressions from Allah, and Khalid is the sword of Allah? Omar says: ‘No, it is not so,’ but Abu Bakr believes that Khalid is the sword of Allah.

Allah’s statement is:

قُلْ تَعالَوْا أَتْلُ ما حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ أَلاَّ تُشْرِكُوا بِهِ شَيْئاً وَ بِالْوالِدَيْنِ إِحْساناً وَ لا تَقْتُلُوا أَوْلادَكُمْ مِنْ إِمْلاقٍ نَحْنُ نَرْزُقُكُمْ وَ إِيَّاهُمْ وَ لا تَقْرَبُوا الْفَواحِشَ ما ظَهَرَ مِنْها وَ ما بَطَنَ وَ لا تَقْتُلُوا النَّفْسَ الَّتي‏ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ إِلاَّ بِالْحَقِّ ذلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُمْ بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُون  ﴿151 وَ لا تَقْرَبُوا مالَ الْيَتيمِ إِلاَّ بِالَّتي‏ هِيَ أَحْسَنُ حَتَّى يَبْلُغَ أَشُدَّهُ وَ أَوْفُوا الْكَيْلَ وَ الْميزانَ بِالْقِسْطِ لا نُكَلِّفُ نَفْساً إِلاَّ وُسْعَها وَ إِذا قُلْتُمْ فَاعْدِلُوا وَ لَوْ كانَ ذا قُرْبى‏ وَ بِعَهْدِ اللَّهِ أَوْفُوا ذلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُمْ بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ ﴿152 وَ أَنَّ هذا صِراطي‏ مُسْتَقيماً فَاتَّبِعُوهُ وَ لا تَتَّبِعُوا السُّبُلَ فَتَفَرَّقَ بِكُمْ عَنْ سَبيلِهِ ذلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُمْ بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ ﴿153 [54]

 ‘…Say, ‘Come on, I will clarify you what your Lord has forbidden you: do not make anything as a partner with Him…and do not give way to any shocking acts which you may practice, either openly or keeping secret. Then do not kill any person whom Allah has forbidden, except through law. These are what you have been recommended so that you may use your reason… and [know] that this is just My right and straight Path, so follow it and do not follow the paths which will abstract you from His path. This is what He has instructed you so that you may become pious, (Qur’an: 6/ 151-153).’  

Back to Index

Next Lesson

  Home Page Book List Subject Catalog Search


[1] Surah 4, "نساء", Verse 59.

[2] in the Commentary of "Kash'shaf", volume 1, page 525.

[3] Ad-Dorr al-Manthoor”, volume 2, page 176.

[4] Ad-Dorr al-Manthoor”, volume 2, page 176.

[5] Ad-Dorr al-Manthoor”, volume 2, page 176.

[6] "تتمة المنتهى‏", page 153. And the “History of Ya‘ghubi”, publication Beirut, (dated 1379), volume 2, page 109; and “majalis” Mofid, publication Najaf, (dated 1367) page 101; and Rozah “Behar al-Anwar”, publication Company, volume 17, page 39; and “Tohfat al-Oghl”, publication Heidari, (dated 1376), page 42; and “Behar al-Anwar”, publication Company, volume 15, part 2nd, page 85, from “Ikmal ad-Din” Sadough; and in the commentary “Fi Zilah al-Qur’an” the third publication, Dar Ihda At-Torath Arabi- Beirut, page 125, from the first section, from Imam Ahmad Hanbal has been related.

[7] Surah 6, "انعام", Verse 89.

[8] Surah 43, "زخرف", Verse 28.

[9] Surah 15, "حجر", Verse 9.

[10] Surah 41, "فصلت", Verse 41-42.

[11] Surah 2, "بقرة", Verse 189.

[12] Surah 8, "انفال", Verse 1.

[13] Surah 2, "بقرة", Verse 222.

[14] Surah 2, "بقرة", Verse 219.

[15] Surah 20, "طه", Verse 105.

[16] Surah 18, "کهف", Verse 83.

[17] "الدر المنثور", volume2, pages 176-177.

[18] "الامامة و السياسة", volume 1, page 13.

[19] "تاريخ ابو الفداء", volume 1, page 158 and "«تاريخ الخميس‏", volume 2, page 233.

[20] "الامامة و السياسة", volume 1, page 17.

[21] "الامامة و السياسة", volume 1, page 14.

[22] "Nahj-ul-Balagha", Feiz-ul-Islam, page 47.

[23] "Shiite and Islam" – Sebt section 2, page 103. And Fakhr Razi in “Nihat al-Oghl” and Abu Obaida Ghasim bin Salas, and Tabari, and Bilazari in “Ansaf al-Ashraf” and Samaani in the book of Fazaeel, and Mohibb ad-Din Tabari in Al-Reyaz an-Nazarah”, and the (History of Khamis” they have confirmed this narrative, and also Jazari in “Kamil” has brought it with this phrase: قد وليّت عليكم ولست بخيركم.

[24] In "Al-Ghadir", volume 5, page 270, he says that Omar has said: "انها كانت فلتة وقى الله شرها", most of them at the page bpttom, ot he has said: فلتة كفلتات الجاهلية (The History of Tabary) and: فمن عاد مثلها فاقتلوه‏ in (الصواعق المحرقه‏)

[25] "تاریخ طبری", volume 2, page 446.


[27] The narrative Abdullah bin Saba, page 92, published in Egypt, and the ‘Ghayat al-Maram’, page 560, concerning Omar’s speech

[28] Al-Ghadir, volume 7, page 152.

[29] Al-Ghadir, volume 7, page 158, narrated from “the history of Abi al-Feda”.

[30] Majalis al-Momenin, page 114.

[31] "Safinat al-Bahar”, volume 2, page 551.

[32] Omar and Abu Bakr's conversation with Malik and the statement of the Messenger of Allah to them is not in "سفينة البحار", it is only put in "مجالس المؤمنين‏", therefore, the Late Mohaddith Ghumi after relating the story of Malik, he has said: … 

[33] "Abdullah bin Saba", page 104, quoting the companions.

[34] Butah is a nickname for water at the territory of Asad bin Khozaima.

[35] The History of Tabari, volume 2, page 503.

[36] It is put in the page bottom of "Abdullah bin Saba, page 105 that:

 ابو قتاده انصارى خزرجى شهد احدا و ما بعدها و شهد مع على فى خلافته مشاهده كلها و توفى فى الكوفة فى خلافة على سنة 38 او سنة 40 و هو ابن سبعين سنة فكبر على فى صلاته عليه ست

[37] "Al-Ghadir", volume 7, page 158

[38] The History of Tabari, volume 2, page 503)

[39] The History of Abul-Feda, page 158.

[40] Tabari, volume 2, page 503, and Ya’ghobi, volume 2, page 132.

[41] The History of Abul-Feda, page 158.

[42] The History of Abul-Feda, page 158.

[43] The History of Abul-Feda, page 158.

[44] The History of Abul-Feda includes Zerar's murder, however,  the term "Give us a chance" is quoted by Amini, volume 7, page 165, in "Al-Ghadir", from "Asabah", volume 3, page 357 and "Mar'aat-al-Janan"volume 1, page 62 .

[45] The History of Ya'qubi, volume 2, page 132.

[46] Tabari, volume 2, page 503.

[47] Tabari, volume 2, page 504.

[48] The History of Abul-Feda, volume 1,  page 158.

[49] The History of al-Khamis, volume 2, page 233.

[50] Tabari, volume 2, page 503, and he also says: قال ابو بكر: هيه يا عمر تاول و اخطا فارفع لسانك عن خالد, and the similar quotation is explained by Abu Bakr in Farid and Judai's "دائرة المعارف‏" , (Encyclopedia),  volume 2, page 106.

[51] Same source

[52] Tabari, volume 2, page 502.

[53] "Al-Ghadir" volume 7, page 160, extracted from "تاريخ ابن شحنه‏" Hamish "the perfect, volume 7, page 165.

[54] Surah 6, "انعام", Verse 151-153.

Back to Index

Next Lesson

  Home Page Book List Subject Catalog Search



about us & help 

All rights reserved for

"The Foundation for Translation and Publication of the Islamic knowledge & sciences"