History of the Caliphs

By: Rasūl Ja’farīan

Translation by: Ali Ebrahimi

p. 11-21
It is impossible to study the incidents after the Prophet’s demise in connection with the leadership of the society without paying attention to the then political parties in Medina. The Ansār (Helpers) were one of the important political parties who were worried about problems and their future after the demise of the Prophet (s) since the fall of Mecca to Muslims. They gathered in Saqīfa, fearing the rule of the Quraysh, although they had sworn allegiance to Imām ‘Alī (a) – who was, they believed, less probable to assume power. Hubāb Ibn Mundhir, one of the influential leaders of Ansār, in his remarks in Saqīfa, considered the Ansār better than the Quraysh and said, “It was their sword that gained victory for Islam.”

He addressed the Ansār and said, “These people (Muhādjirūn (Immigrants)) are your booties and your subjects and dare not stand against you.”[1] Hubāb’s words have to mean that whatever made the Ansār do this unwise act, was their fear from and competition with the Quraysh. On the other hand, a number of the Muhādjirūn who had shown suspicious behavior two weeks before the Prophet’s passing, hearing about the Saqīfa gathering, wasted no time in attending the place and arguing with the Ansār.

The news of the negotiations was revealed later in Medina by the second caliph in one of his sermons. He was in Mecca when he was told that someone had said, “Swearing allegiance to Abū Bakr happened all of a sudden.” This made ‘Umar very angry and he decided to talk to the people about it in Mecca.

‘Abd al-Rahmān Ibn ‘Awf said to ‘Umar, “You are in a city where all Arab tribes are present. If you say something now, it will be spread in all cities.”

When ‘Umar came to Medina, he went to the pulpit and addressed the people, “I have been told that some people have said swearing allegiance to Abū Bakr took place suddenly. I swear by my life that it was so. But God bestowed you its good and protected you against its bad side. After the Prophet’s demise, we were told that the Ansār had gathered with Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda in the vicinity of Banū Sā‘ida. Abū Bakr, Abū ‘Ubayda and I went to them and on our way, we came across two men from the Ansār. They assured us that the Ansār did not intend to do something contrary to our views, but we decided to see for ourselves.”

The spokesman of the Ansār said, “We, the Ansār, are the unified army of Islam and you, O Quraysh, were a small group of us and a minority among us!”

I wanted to respond to him but Abū Bakr prevented me and he himself said, “Whatever you say about the Ansār is, of course, true but the Arabs do not recognize “caliphate” except for the Quraysh race. They are the best of Arabs in lineage and in noble birth. I propose swearing allegiance to ‘Umar or Abū ‘Ubayda (who were the only men of the Muhādjirūn in the gathering).”

The speaker of Ansār said, “Let there be an emir from us and another from you.”[2]

I responded, “Two swords cannot be put in a scabbard. Then, I raised Abū Bakr’s hand and swore allegiance to him.”

‘Umar added, “The Muhādjirūn and the Ansār swore allegiance to him. (Of course, there were only three men of the Muhādjirūn in the gathering.) We feared to leave the gathering lest they might swear allegiance to another one and force us to obey him! Or make a tumult with our opposition. Of course, swearing allegiance to Abū Bakr was impromptu, and it was not other than a divine blessing to repel a bad omen from us, and there is no likeness of. Therefore, whoever swears allegiance with a person without “Muslims’ consultation”, neither he nor the sworn one deserves obedience; otherwise, both will be in danger of assassination.”[3]

The caliph gave a brief report on Saqīfa, but it was enough for disclosing part of the realities. The comprehensive report on Saqīfa is available in Abū Bakr Djuwharī’s (323 AD) al-Saqīfa.[4]

Ibn A‘tham writes, “Before the arrival of the Muhādjirūn, serious arguments were raised among the Ansār. One of the Ansār said, “Select someone whose countenance frightens the Quraysh and makes the Ansār feel safe.” A few proposed Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda.

Usayd Ibn Hudayr, one of the nobles of Aws, rose in objection and said, “Caliphate should remain in the Quraysh.” Others spoke against him. Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d defended the Quraysh and ‘Uwaym Ibn Sā‘ida said, “Caliphate will be exclusive to the Infallible Household of the Prophet(s). Put it where God has placed it.”[5] Ibn A‘tham’s report shows the internal oppositions inside the Ansār.

Usayd Ibn Hudayr from Aws and Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d who was Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda’s cousin, were the first men of the Ansār who swore allegiance to Abū Bakr in Saqīfa. We all know that later on, the Ansār became dissatisfied with the rule of the Quraysh.

According to Zubayr Ibn Bakkār, the people of Aws said, “It was Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d of Khazradj who swore allegiance first. And the people of Khazradj said it was Usayd Ibn Hudayr.” [6]

Abū Bakr knew about such a contention, so in Saqīfa he said, “If the men of Aws assume power, the people of Khazradj will not accept it and there will be bloody fights among them all the time.”[7]

According to Ya‘qūbī, ‘Abd al-Rahmān Ibn ‘Awf, too, was in Saqīfa. This is not true. Whatever Ya‘qūbī has quoted from him were told a day later in the mosque.

He addressed the Ansār and said, “Although you are people of essential excellence but there is no likeness of Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Alī (a) among you.”

Mundhir Ibn Arqam stood up and said, “We do not deny excellence of the people you named. If one of these people seeks caliphate (he meant Imām ‘Alī (a)), there will be no objection to his request.” Then Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d and Usayd Ibn Hudayr rose and swore allegiance; and many followed them so that Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda was about to be killed in the stampede.[8]

Barā’ Ibn ‘Āzib went to the The Hāshimites and said, “They swore allegiance to Abū Bakr.”

The men of the Hāshimites said Muslims would never do that in their absence. “We are the offspring of Muhammad (s)!”

‘Abbās said, “I swear by the God of Ka‘ba, they did.”

Ya‘qūbī adds, “The Muhādjirūn and the Ansār had no doubts on Imām ‘Alī (a).”[9]

Tabarī and Ibn Athīr have said the Ansār or a number of them present in Saqīfa said they swore allegiance only to ‘Alī (a).[10]

According to Ibn Qutayba, Hubāb Ibn Mundhir took his sword off its sheath when he saw the Ansār swearing allegiance but they disarmed him.

He addressed the Ansār, “You must wait and see your children begging for a bowl of water and a loaf of bread in the doorsteps of the Quraysh.”[11]

According to all historians, the most important reasoning of Abū Bakr and ‘Umar was Abū Bakr’s kinship with the Prophet (s) and his age, although there are some references to his merits in some documents.

They addressed the Ansār and said, “Arabs will only accept this race of Quraysh[12] and they will never accept prophethood in a family and caliphate in another family.” [13]

Abū Bakr in Saqīfa said, نحن قريش والأئمة من “We are from the Quraysh and the Imāms must be from us.”[14]

Later on, when Imām ‘Alī (a) expressed his objections to Abū Bakr and ‘Umar about how they had relied on “kinship” knowing that he was closer to the Prophet (s), ‘Umar said, “Arabs do not want to see prophethood and caliphate in a single family.[15] Prophethood belonged to you, so let the caliphate be for other families!”

There is no doubt that after avoiding allegiance to ‘Alī (a) in Saqīfa, tribal opposition began and finally, the Quraysh introduced its “tribal superiority” to make use of the internal conflicts of the Ansār and win the caliphate despite their limited influence in Medina. Followers of Abū Bakr considered his age as a criterion at a time when Imām ‘Alī (a) was young.

When Salmān heard the news of the allegiance, he said, “You selected the most aged one but made a mistake about the Infallible Household of your prophet. If you swore allegiance to them, two people would not oppose you.”[16]

It should be noted that no reliable and documented words were uttered on the issue of Saqīfa and the way of the caliph’s selection. Of course, we must ignore the false quotations made up to show Abū Bakr rightful[17] for the caliphate that said the Prophet (s) had chosen not only Abū Bakr, but also the succeeding caliphs.[18] What is important to us, is the Saqīfa talks and the sideline incidents. The Ansār considered caliphate to themselves; the Muhādjirūn – Abū Bakr, ‘Umar and Abū ‘Ubayda – went to Saqīfa and said caliphate was exclusive to the Quraysh. They did not rely on any traditions such as “The Imāms are from the Quraysh,” and said Arabs would not obey any other race than the Quraysh. Among them, some great companions of the Prophet (s) such as Zubayr and Talha[19] did not consider Abū Bakr the right one to assume power.

Therefore, there was no recognized method or preconditions for selecting Abū Bakr except his kinship with the Prophet (s), “tribal superiority” of the Quraysh and tribal criteria. Being from the Quraysh was in no sense a prerequisite for assuming the title of caliph. Many years after his caliphate, ‘Umar wished “Sālim” Mawlā Hudhayfa Ibn Yamān were alive to rule after him.[20] Sālim was not a man of the Quraysh. Some believe that the prerequisite of being from the Quraysh by descent was introduced in the Sunnites political jurisprudence since the third century.[21] The only criteria in Saqīfa were linkage to the Quraysh and Abū Bakr’s age. These were the only criteria of the Dark Age along with the political conflicts that granted him caliphate, not a combination of the pagan and Islamic criteria that Dr. Khayr al-Dīn Sawī has stated.[22] There are other documents at hand that Abū Bakr attached special significance to the Quraysh and its nobility.

Ibn ‘Asākir says, “Some time after the conversion of Abū Sufyān to Islam; Bilāl; Suhayb Rūmī, and Salmān scorned him. Abū Bakr asked angrily why they behaved that way with “the Shiykh and master of the Quraysh”. They complained about this in the presence of the Prophet (s) and he asked Abū Bakr to apologize.[23]

After the allegiance in Saqīfa, they left the place. According to Barā’ Ibn ‘Āzib, they walked in the alleys and rubbed the hands of whoever they met to Abū Bakr’s hands, not paying attention to the person’s willingness or unwillingness.

Bara’ adds, “I rushed to the door of the Hāshimites to give the news.”[24] Their interest in allegiance was so immense that according to Ibn Abī Shayba, they did not attend the funeral ceremony of the Prophet (s) and returned to the city after the ceremony.[25]

Finishing the allegiance swearing, ‘Umar stood up and apologized for whatever he had said the day before on the continuation of the Prophet’s life until the death of his last companion, and indeed for his claim on offering guidance to the Prophet (s). He said he believed that the Prophet (s) would live long to organize the affairs, but now he witnessed that the Qur’ān was left among them and the people swore allegiance to the best companion of the Prophet (s).[26] This shows that ‘Umar was waiting for the selection of the anticipated caliph and he had no problem after that.

Some people rose in objection. In addition to two distinguished personalities of the The Hāshimites, i.e. Imām ‘Alī (a) and ‘Abbās, there were some other influential people such as Zubayr Ibn ‘Awām, Khālid Ibn Sa‘īd, Miqdād Ibn ‘Amr, Salmān, Abūdhar, ‘Ammār, Barā’ Ibn ‘Āzib, and Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b.[27]

Abū Bakr’s followers went to visit Ubayy Ibn Ka‘b but he did not open the door for them.[28] ‘Umar, Abū ‘Ubayda Djarrāh, Mughīra Ibn Shu‘ba and Khālid Ibn Walīd were the chief organizers of this program. At Imām ‘Alī’s doorstep, ‘Umar severely and seriously asked him to swear allegiance to Abū Bakr.

Imām said, “Your greed for Abū Bakr’s rule today is to have the caliphate tomorrow.”[29]

Those who had gathered in Imām ‘Alī’s house faced the harsh behavior of ‘Umar and his followers. ‘Umar took Zubayr’s sword and broke it, then threatened the residents of the house that he would set the house on fire. For the list of those sitting in Imām ‘Alī’s house and the names of those who broke into the house, refer to the following sources.[30]

According to Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, ‘Umar who had a brand of fire in his hand, threatened to set the house on fire. When Fātima (a) asked him whether he was serious, he said he was unless they accepted whatever the nation had accepted.[31] Fātima asked the sit-in people to disperse because she was sure ‘Umar would set the house ablaze.[32]

Getting allegiance by force and threatening to set the house on fire, which were followed later on by the other caliphs (such as Ibn Zubayr in his exacting allegiance from the Hāshimites) [33] could have stemmed from here.

Of course, the Quraysh started talks in addition to using force. Upon Mughīra’s advice, they went to ‘Abbās to include him and his family, too, in the allegiance move and alleviate their problems by pleasing the Prophet’s uncle, but ‘Abbās rejected their invitation.[34]

Amīr al-Mu’minīn and Fātima did their best to return the right of caliphate from Abū Bakr to Imām ‘Alī (a) but it was fruitless. Their efforts have been recorded in the books of Abū Bakr Djuwharī and others.[35] There is no doubt that Fātima (a) was angry with Abū Bakr and ‘Umar for trampling on her right in the issue of the Prophet’s heritage, the Fadak case[36] and the Imamate of Muslims and she passed away sore in the heart.[37]

Zuhrī says, “Imām ‘Alī (a) buried Fātima’s body at night and did not let Abū Bakr know it. Until before her death, Imām ‘Alī (a) and none of the Hāshimites men swore allegiance to Abū Bakr.[38] Later on, Imām ‘Alī (a) swore allegiance to protect the unity of Muslims against the idolaters and infidels.”[39]

In his response to Abū Sufyān’s request who asked him not to let caliphate remain in the hands of the Banū Taym, Imām ‘Alī said, “You have always been an enemy of Islam and Muslims.”[40]

At any rate, there is no doubt that Imām ‘Alī (a) did not swear allegiance to Abū Bakr until after the death of Fātima (a).[41]

Madā’inī has written that with the beginning of the war against the infidels, ‘Uthmān came to Imām ‘Alī (a) and said, “No one will join you in your fight against infidels unless you swear allegiance to Abū Bakr.” He insisted and took Imām to Abū Bakr’s place and ‘Alī (a) swore allegiance and it made Muslims very happy.[42]

Mas‘ūdī says, “Fātima, sitting at the side of the Prophet’s grave, recited the following poem”,

لوكنت شاهدها لم تكثر الخطب[43]

قدكان بعدك انباء وهينمة

“After you, there appeared events that if you had been alive to see them, you would have never made so many speeches.”

Fātima’s opposition was very important to the caliph as far as his public prestige was concerned. Abū Bakr did his best to come to terms with her but she never accepted. This made the caliph express his deep regret in the final years of his life for invading Fātima’s house. Many historians have quoted him as wishing he had never inspected Zahrā’s house.[44]

Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda was another opponent of Abū Bakr.[45] He did not swear allegiance with Abū Bakr and went to Damascus, and as has been quoted, was assassinated there in the time of the second caliph. The common news in historical documents is that genies killed him and they composed two verses on this. But, fact according to Balādhurī and Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih, is that a man from Damascus was sent by ‘Umar to ask him to swear allegiance and when ‘Ubāda did not accept, he killed him.[46]

Abū Bakr’s policy differed from that of ‘Umar in that ‘Umar believed in using force to get allegiance from his opponents, but Abū Bakr did not recommend it although he also believed in this principle. Both had dual policies but ‘Umar, according to authentic documents, used force while Abū Bakr said in one of his sermons, “لا بيعة لي في عنقه وهو بالخيار من أمره “‘Alī has no obligation or commitment to swear allegiance to me and he is free in his choice.”[47]

[1] al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol.I, pp.24-25
[2] Hubāb Ibn Mundhir said that neither Muhādjirūn nor Ansār accepted each other. Masā’il al-imāma, p.13
[3] Ibn Abī Shayba, al-Musannaf, vol.VII, p.431 (‘Umar said, “فمن دعا إلى مثلها فهو الذي لا بيعة له ولا لمن بايعه” “Whoever calls on people do this, neither his allegiance nor that of someone’s who calls to his obedience is acceptable.” ‘Abd al-Razzāq, al-Musannaf, vol.V, pp.442-445 (briefly said); Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.III, p.344; Tārīkh al-tabarī, vol.III, pp.204-206; see distorted and disgraceful narrations of ‘Umar’s speech in, Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.581
[4] This book is lost but major part of it is mentioned by Ibn Abi l-Hadīd in Sharh nahdj al-balāgha. These quotations have been collected by Muhammad Hādī Amīnī in a separate book titled “Al-Saqīfa wa Fadak” and published.
[5] al-Futūh, vol.I, pp.3-4; Wāqidī, Kitāb al-ridda, pp.32-33
[6] al-Muwaffaqiyyāt, p.578; Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, p.272. Hubāb Ibn Mundhir said to Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d in Saqīfa, “You swore allegiance to Abū Bakr out of envy towards Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda (Kitāb al-ridda, p.42). When Usayd Ibn Hudayr passed away, ‘Umar paid off all his debts (al-Fā’iq fī gharīb al-hadīth, vol.I, p.108). Hubāb Ibn Mundhir composed poem in Saqīfa in reproaching those two men, part of which is so (Kitāb al-ridda, p.38)
وأسرع منه في الفساد بشير

سعي ابن حضير في الفساد لجاجة
Ibn Hudayr much embraced on evil-doings and Bashīr did more than him.
[7] Nathr al-durr, vol.II, p.14; al-Bayān wa l-tabyīn, vol.III, p.298; al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol.I, p.27; Masā’il al-imāma, p.13
[8] Sa‘d Ibn ‘Ubāda never paid allegiance to Abū Bakr and when he was in Damascus, caliph sent somebody to kill him and he was killed; Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.250
[9] Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, pp.123-124; one of the Ansār is reported to have said, “If ‘Alī and other people of the Hāshimites had not been engaged in burying the Messenger (s) in the house and not been there in worry about him, no one would have had caprice of caliphate, Kitāb al-ridda, pp.45-46. Wāqidī’s report reveals that ‘Abd al-Rahmān Ibn ‘Awf talked to the Ansār after Saqīfa event. Evidence of a good number indicates that nobody was present at Saqīfa except three people of Muhādjirūn.
Later on, Bashīr Ibn Sa‘d Ansāri, after hearing of Imām ‘Alī’s reasoning said to him, “In case people had heard you speaking this way before, nobody would have disagreed with you and all would have paid allegiance to you. But you stayed home and people thought you were not in need of caliphate!
Imām responded, “O son of Bashīr ! Should I have left the Messenger’s corpse at home and quarelling with people on succession?”
Abū Bakr said, “They have paid allegiance to me now and if I had known your will, I would have never sought after it myself. You’re free to swear allegiance to me.”
Imām paid allegiance to him seventy five days after departure of the Messenger (s) when Fātima (a) passed away, Kitāb al-ridda, p.47
[10] Tārīkh al-tabarī, vol.III, p.208; al-Kāmil fi l-tārīkh, vol.II, p.325
[11] al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol.I, p.27; Kitāb al-ridda, p.42. Harra event, Djuwharī says, in 63 A.H. confirmed what Hubāb said to Abū Bakr, “I fear not of you but of those after you (Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.I, p.313). About Ansār’s repentance after Saqīfa, al-Muwaffaqiyyāt, p.583
Hubāb said, “Since we killed their fathers in wars, they would take revenge on us.” (Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.580); al-Fā’iq fī gharīb al-hadīth, vol.III, p.166; Masā’il al-imāma, p.135
In this case, we should see how Imām was treated. In Badr, they have murdered half of Quraysh totaling seventy people. Certainly, it has to be known that the Ansār felt remorseful of what they had done and so they stood against defending ‘Alī, Quraysh and its political party, from ‘Uthmān and Mu‘āwīya to Talha, Zubayr and ‘Āyisha in Djamal, Siffīn or before by having a hand in ‘Uthmān’s murder or staying silent towards it. Even a few days after Saqīfa, their remorse was revealed and Hassān Ibn Thābit’s then poems best prove that. Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, pp.127-128
[12] Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.582
[13] Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, p.38
[14] Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.583, والعرب لا ترضى أن يؤمّركم وبينها من غيركم ولكن يؤمرون من كانت النبوة فيهم “Arabs never appoint you as ruler but those who were in touch with prophethood.” Kitāb al-ridda, p.39; Abū Bakr in his speech relied on this, “قريش أوسط العرب داراً وأكرمهم أحساباً ً “The Qurayshites are the most outstanding and noble ‘Arab dynasty.” Tabaqāt al-kubrā, vol.II, p.269; Following above sentence quoted from Abū Bakr, in Nathr al-durr, vol.II, p.13 it is added through Abū Bakr, “وأحسنهم وجوهاً أكثر الناس ولادة في العرب “The most good-looking people were more among those who were given birth among Arabs.” Abū Bakr said, نحن قريش والأئمة منا “We are the Qurayshites and Imāms are from us” as a hadith although this was attributed to him later.
[15] al-Īdāh, p.87. ‘Umar said to Ibn ‘Abbās, “Your people did not want to have the prophethood and caliphate in your family because, in that case, pride elevated you to the sky; Nathr al-durr, vol.II, p.28
[16] al-Saqīfa wa Fadak, p.43; Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, p.49 and Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.590; Abū ‘Ubayda Djarrāh talked about ‘Alī’s younghood when Imām objected, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, pp.2-5
[17] ‘Āyisha is quoted to have been questioned, “Whom did the Messenger (s) find as his successor?”
“Abū Bakr”, she replied.
“Who would be his successor?”, she was asked.
“‘Umar”, she answered.
“And after ‘Umar”, she was questioned.
“Abū ‘Ubayda Djarrāh”, she replied.
(Ibn Abī Shayba, al-Musannaf, vol.VII, p.433)
The date of forging this hadith shall be found within the hadith proper.
[18] al-Ghadīr, vol.V (issue, Silsilat al-Mawdū‘āt fi l-khilāfa) pp.333-356. According to Waqidī in al-Ridda (pp.35-37) it seems that the Messenger (s) has placed Abū Bakr as his successor as clarified in Saqīfa several times!
[19] Nihāyat al-’irab, vol.XIX, p.39
[20] Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.I, p.190; al-‘Iqd al-farīd, vol.II, p.274, vol.III, p.407; Tārīkh al-madīnat al-munawwara, vol.II, p.881; Masā’il al-imāma, p.63; Mukhtasar Tārīkh Dimashq, vol.XII, p.69
[21] Tatawwur al-fikr al-siyāsī ‘Ind ahl al-Sunna, p.38
[22] Tatawwur al-fikr al-siyāsī, p.38, footnote IV
[23] Mukhtasar Tārīkh Dimashq, vol.V, p.261
[24] al-Saqīfa wa Fadak, p.46
[25] Ibn Abī Shayba, al-Musannaf, vol.VII, p.432
Hishām Ibn ‘Urwa quotes his father, ان ابا بكر وعمر لم يشهدا دفن النبي (ص) وكانا في الانصار فدفن قبل ان يرجعا Abū Bakr and ‘Umar were with the Ansār when the Prophet (s) was to be buried, and before they came back, the Prophet (s) had been buried
Wāqidī says, “What seems correct to me is that the Prophet (s) has been buried Saturday. (al-Bad’ wa l-tārīkh, vol.V, p.47); therefore, it is clear that Abū Bakr and his fellow had been busy since Monday till tomorrow when the Prophet (s) passed away and they could not come by his dead body. These two people are hardly mentioned among those named in reports concerned with his burial.
[26] al-Bad’ wa l-tārīkh, vol.IV, pp.65-66
[27] Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, p.124
[28] al-Saqīfa wa Fadak, p.47
[29] Ansāb al-ashrāf, vol.I, p.587. According to Ibn Qutayba, ‘Alī said to him, “Milk in a way you can have part of it; al-Imāma wa l-siyāsa, vol.I, p.29
[30] Ma‘ālim al-madrisatayn, vol.II, pp.163-166; Talkhīs al-shāfī, pp.76, 156
[31] al-‘Iqd al-farīd, vol.III, p.64; Tārīkh ’Abi l-fidā’, vol.I, p.156 quoted from, Ma‘ālim al-madrisatayn, vol.II, p.167
About other sources talking about threat, Ma‘ālim al-madrisatayn, vol.II, pp.167-168
Abū Bakr in his time of death was concerned about a few things, one was that he wished he had never opened Fātima’s house door even if they had closed it with the aim of war (Ma‘ālim al-madrisatayn,, vol.II, p.165, footnote LXV from various sources)
[32] al-Mudhakkar wa l-tadhkīr wa l-dhikr, p.91; Ibn Abī Shayba, al-Musannaf, vol. VII, p.432
[33] Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.XX, p.147
[34] Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.I, p.220; Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, pp.124-125
[35] Tarīkh al-ya‘qūbī, vol.II, p.126; Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, pp.5-28 and 67; Waq‘at al-siffīn, p.182; Kitāb al-ridda, p.46
[36] About what happened to Fadak during the Umayya and the ‘Abbāsids, al-Kharādj wa Sanā‘at al-kitāba, pp.259-260
[37] ‘Abd al-Razzāq, al-Musannaf, vol.V, p.472. The same quotation comes from Zuhrī in Bukhārī, vol.VI, p.122.Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.VI, pp.49-50; vol.XVI, pp.253,281,282; al-Bidāya wa l-Nihāya, vol.V, pp.285,287
[38] ‘Abd al-Razzāq, al-Musannaf, vol.V, p.472
[39] It was for the same reason Imām opposed to Abū Sufyān who had been willing to pay allegiance to Imām, Nathr al-durr, vol.I, p.400
[40] Nihāyat al-’irab, vol.XIX, p.40
[41] Aside from false narrations against the chronicles, Imām swore allegiance just when ‘Umar and Abū Bakr stopped by him in his house, Nihāyat al-’irab, vol.XIX, pp.39,40
[42] Talkhīs al-shāfī, vol.III, p.77
[43] Murūdj al-dhahab, vol.II, p.304; Ibn Abi l-Hadīd, Sharh nahdj al-balāgha, vol.II, p.50, vol.VI, p.43, vol.XVI, pp.212, 251; al-Bad’ wa l-tārīkh, vol.V, pp.68-69, there, “Wahaynama” is replaced with “Wahanbatha”; in addition, another line is added too.
[44] Hayāt al-sahaba, vol.II, p.24; Kanz al-‘Ummāl, vol.V, No.14113; Ibn Sallām, al-Amwāl, p.194
[45] Nihāyat al-’irab, vol.XIX, p.38; it is cited there a group of Khazradjīs failed to pay allegiance in Saqīfa.
[46] al-Mi‘yār wa l-Muwāzana, p.232 (quoted from Balādhurī and Ibn ‘Abdirabbih in the footnote). Interestingly, Ibn Abi l-Hadīd (XVII, 223-224) says that some knew Abū Bakr as his murderer but he has not found a historical report concerningly. This is while the aforesaid report is cited in two historical sources, of course about caliph II.
[47] al-Sīrat al-halabiyya, vol.III, p.389 (al-Ghadīr, vol.V, p.368)

 

Source: maaref-foundation.com


more post like this