Various interactions between Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the Hashimis, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu in particular, will be discussed in this chapter including:
The deductions and points drawn from all the forthcoming incidents―which are signs of the love and compassion they enjoyed and the absence of family rivalry―will be listed at the end to keeps things brief.
Previously, it was clarified that Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was appointed judge during the reigns of Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq and Sayyidina ‘Umar al Faruq radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Many a time, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu would supervise the implementation of legal punishments. In a similar way, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was tasked with passing judgements and enforcing laws. If any legal punishments were to be carried out, Sayyidina ‘Uthman would at many times give the responsibility of this to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.
For the khalifah of the Muslims to fulfil all tasks by himself at one and the same time is a formidable task, nay impossible. Bearing this in mind, for the smooth running of state affairs, Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu would be tasked with some of these aspects and he would fulfil them in a superb manner.
‘Allamah al Bayhaqi has explained the methodology followed in settling court cases during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate in the following manner. He writes via his sanad:
عن عمر بن عثمان بن عبد الله بن سعيد و كان اسمه الصرم فسماه رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم سعيدا قال حدثني جدي قال كان عثمان رضي الله عنه إذا جلس على المقاعد جاءه الخصمان فقال لأحدهما اذهب ادع عليا و قال للآخر اذهب فادع طلحة و الزبير و نفرا من أصحاب النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم ثم يقول لهما تكلما ثم يقبل على القوم فيقول ما تقولون فإن قالوا ما يوافق رأيه مضاه و إلا نظر فيه بعد فيقومان و قد سلما
‘Umar ibn ‘Uthman ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’id (whose name was Sarm (lit. severance, forsake) and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam named him Sa’id (fortunate)) says―my grandfather narrated to me:
When ‘Uthman would sit to settle disputes, the two adversaries would approach him. He would order the one to call ‘Ali and the other to call Talhah, Zubair, and a group of Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum of the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He would then tell them to present their case. Thereafter, he would look at the seniors and enquire, “What do you say?” If their opinion conformed to his, he would pass it. Otherwise, he would reflect over the matter afterwards. The parties would leave pleased with the judgement.
Shia scholars have acknowledged that meting out legal punishments during the era of the three khulafa’ was the job of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. This narration appears with a sanad in Qurb al Isnad from Imam Jafar:
جعفر بن محمد عن آبائه أن أبا بكر و عمر و عثمان كانوا يرفعون الحدود إلى علي ابن أبي طالب إلخ
Jafar ibn Muhammad narrates from his forefathers that Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman would hand over the meting out of legal punishments to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.
Religious interactions between them was stable by mutual participation and mutual assistance. Some incidents will be mentioned below.
عن حصين بن ساسان الرقاشي قال عثمان بن عفان و أتى بالوليد بن عقبة قد شرب الخمر و شهد عليه حمران بن أبان و رجل آخر فقال عثمان لعلي أقم عليه الحد فأمر علي عبد الله بن جعفر أن يجلده فأخذ في جلده و علي يعد حتى جلد أربعين ثم قال له أمسك قال جلد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم أربعين و جلد أبو بكر أربعين و عمر صدرا من خلافته ثم أتمها عمر ثمانين و كل سنة و هذا أحب إلي
Hussain ibn Sasan al Raqqashi narrates:
I was present in the company of ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan when Walid ibn ‘Uqbah, who had just consumed liquor, was brought and Humran ibn Aban and another man had testified against him. ‘Uthman told ‘Ali, “Implement the legal punishment on him.” In compliance, ‘Ali ordered ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar to flog him. He began lashing him while ‘Ali counted. As soon as he reached forty, ‘Ali told him, “Stop!” He then recalled, “Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam gave forty lashes. Abu Bakr gave forty and ‘Umar did the same during the initial years of his Caliphate. ‘Umar thereafter increased it to eighty. All are Sunnah and this is the most pleasing to me.”
This incident briefly appears in Sahih al Bukhari in the following words:
إن عثمان دعا عليا فأمره أن يجلده فجلده ثمانين
‘Uthman summoned ‘Ali and ordered him to lash Walid. Accordingly, he lashed him with 80 lashes.
This incident is corroborated by reports in books regarded authentic by the Shia. Al Kulayni in Furu’ al Kafi, Ibn Shaharashub in al Manaqib, and Ibn Abi al Hadid in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah have related this incident:
قال سمعت أبا جعفر عليه السلام يقول إن الوليد بن عقبة حين شهد عليه يشرب الخمر قال عثمان لعلي صلوات الله اقض بينه و بين هؤلاء الذين يزعمون أنه شرب الخمر فأمر علي فجلد بسوط له شعبتان أربعين جلدة
I heard Abu Jafar rahimahu Llah saying:
After testimony was given against Walid ibn ‘Uqbah for drinking liquor, ‘Uthman told ‘Ali rahimahu Llah, “Pass verdict between him and these men who claim that he drank liquor.” Accordingly, ‘Ali instructed that he be whipped 40 lashes with a whip that contained two branches and this was carried out.
The increase Amir al Mu’minin Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu made to the punishment of drinking liquor to 80 lashes was due to the circumstances at the time, for there was a need for a more stern admonishment and rebuke. Moreover, this was decided upon in the presence and with the consent of the senior Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. An indication to this is that this practice continued during the Caliphate of Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu supported it through his statement and action. He declared, “Both are sunnah.” No Sahabi (whether Hashimi or non-Hashimi) labelled this addition as a contradiction to the Sunnah.
For further satisfaction of the readers, we submit that if increase in punishment in times of need is labelled a bid’ah (innovation) (which was practiced by Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu), then:
ایں گناہیست کہ در شہر شما نیز کنںد
This sin is also prevalent in your city.
The infallible Imams have determined the punishment of consuming liquor to be 80 lashes. Study the following text from the Shia book Furu’ al Kafi:
عن إسحق بن عمار قال سألت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام عن رجل شرب حسرة خمر قال يجدل ثمانين جلدة قليلها و كثيرها حرام
Ishaq ibn ‘Ammar reports:
I asked Abu ‘Abdullah rahimahu Llah about a person who drinks a sip of wine. He replied, “He will be lashed 80 times. A little quantity and a large quantity of it are impermissible.”
Another narration reads:
أبو عبد الله عليه السلام يقول إن في كتاب علي صلوات الله عليه يضرب شارب الخمر ثمانين و شارب النبيذ ثمانين
Abu ‘Abdullah rahimahu Llah says, “It appears in the book of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu: The consumer of wine will be lashed 80 times and the consumer of nabidh will be lashed 80 times.”
We learn from the above statement of Jafar al Sadiq that the addition to the punishment of consuming liquor in times of need is not an innovation at all.
NB: The discussion on Walid ibn ‘Uqbah’s drinking wine and his subsequent punishment will, Allah willing, appear in section 2 [volume 4]. The answers to the allegations raised against Walid ibn ‘Uqbah will appear in detail and you will be able to study the rest of this discussion there.
The following incident appears in Musnad Ahmed under the narrations of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu:
عن الحسن بن سعد عن أبيه أن يحنس و صفية كانا من سبي الخمس فزنت صفية برجل من الخمس فولدت غلاما فادعاه الزاني و يحنس فاختصما إلى عثمان فرفعهما إلى علي بن أبي طالب فقال علي أقضي فيهما بقضاء رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم الولد للفراش و للعاهر الحجر و جلدهما خمسين خمسين
Hassan ibn Sa’d reports from his father:
Yahnus and Safiyyah were from the prisoners of the khums. Safiyyah committed adultery with another prisoner from the khums and subsequently gave birth to a boy. The fornicator as well as Yahnus claimed to be the father of the child. So they took their dispute to ‘Uthman who referred them to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. ‘Ali stated, “I will pass between them the judgement of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam: ‘The child belongs to the husband and the fornicator receives stoning.’ He then whipped them both 50 times each.
In this incident, Sayyidina ‘Uthman and Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma discussed the matter and then the criminal was punished.
عن سالم بن عبد الله و أبان بن عثمان و زيد بن حسن أن عثمان بن عفان أتي برجل قد فجر بغلام من قريش فقال أحصن قالوا قد تزوج بامرأة و لم يدخل بها بعد فقال علي لعثمان لو دخل بها لحل عليه الرجم فأما إذا لم يدخل بها فاجلده الحد فقال أبو أيوب أشهد أني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يقول الذي ذكر أبو الحسن فأمر به عثمان فجلد مائة
Salim ibn ‘Abdullah, Aban ibn ‘Uthman, and Zaid ibn Hassan report that a man who sodomised a lad from Quraysh was brought to ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. ‘Uthman enquired, “Is he muhsan (married)?”
They replied, “He did marry a girl but he has not consummated the marriage (he is not living with her yet).”
‘Ali told ‘Uthman, “Had he consummated the marriage, he would have been stoned. But now that he has not, enforce the punishment (lashing) on him.”
Hearing this, Abu Ayub said, “I testify that I heard Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam say what Abu al Hassan has mentioned.”
‘Uthman thus commanded that he be lashed and he was lashed 100 times.
The Shia scholars report this incident in Furu’ al Kafi from Imam Jafar al Sadiq:
عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام قال إن عثمان أتاه رجل من قيس بمولى له لطم عينه فأنزل الماء فيها و هي قائمة ليس يبصر بها شيئا فقال له أعطيك الدية فأبى قال فأرسل بهما إلى علي عليه السلام و قال احكم بين هذين فأعطاه الدية فأبى قال فلم يزالوا يعطونه حتى أعطو ديتين قال فقال ليس أريد إلا القصاص إلخ
Abu ‘Abdullah rahimahu Llah reports:
A man from Qais came to ‘Uthman with his master who slapped him and (poked his eye) which resulted in the eye losing its water. The eye was still intact, but he could not see a thing. (To reach a compromise) ‘Uthman said [to the victim], “I will give you blood money.” But he refused. He sent them to ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and instructed him to pass judgement between them. ‘Ali also presented blood money to him but he refused to accept it. They continued persuading him to accept the blood money and even offered him double the amount but he refused and said, “I do not want anything besides qisas (legal retribution).”
From the above incidents we learn that Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu worked as a right hand man for Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhuma during his Caliphate in implementing hudud (legal punishments) and ahkam (decrees).
During the ‘Uthmani Caliphate, other members of the Hashimi family (who are cousins to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) were appointed as judges and they gladly accepted these posts and aided in the management of the affairs of state. Moreover, some Hashimi youngsters were appointed as governors over significant areas. They assumed high positions of the state and participated in management of the state so it may run smoothly. Their objective was the establishment and management of the Islamic government, which they worked towards diligently, and the revival and survival of the religious administration, which they upheld on a lofty standard.
Tribal segregation, specialities of lineage, and family feuds were unknown to them. These are ideologies which were created many years later. Let the readers make a special note of this assertion.
A handful of incidents will be displayed to the readers to prove these points. Hopefully, they will prove satisfactory.
The grandson of Abu Talib’s brother, Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib; Mughirah ibn Nawfal ibn Harith al Qurashi al Hashimi was born in Makkah Mukarramah prior to the hijrah during the days of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He was a lad with superb intelligence, courage, and thought. After the demise of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he married Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam granddaughter Umamah bint Abi al ‘As radiya Llahu ‘anha. Umamah’s mother is Sayyidah Zainab radiya Llahu ‘anha, the daughter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
It is written about Mughirah ibn Nawfal in the books of biographies:
و كان المغيرة بن نوفل قاضيا في خلافة عثمان
Mughirah ibn Nawfal was a judge during the Caliphate of ‘Uthman.
The great grandson of Abu Talib’s brother, Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib, is ‘Abdullah ibn al Harith ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib al Qurashi al Hashimi. His mother is Sayyidah Hind bint Abi Sufyan radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. ‘Abdullah was born during the lifetime of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his mother Hind brought him to her sister Sayyidah Umm Habibah radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wife. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam came home, he enquired as to who the child was. “He is the child of your paternal cousin (Abu Sufyan) and my sister,” she replied. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thereafter placed his blessed saliva in the infant’s mouth and supplicated in his favour.
It is recorded about him:
أنه كان على مكة زمن عثمان
He was the governor of Makkah during ‘Uthman’s reign.
The authors of the biographies of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum affirm that ‘Abdullah’s father, Sayyidina Harith ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib al Hashimi radiya Llahu ‘anhu, was a Sahabi and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam appointed him over significant affairs in Makkah. He remained in this position during the Siddiqi and Faruqi reigns and this was maintained during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate as well. Thereafter, he relocated to Basrah and passed away there towards the end of the ‘Uthmani Caliphate.
The following texts sum it up:
و استعمل رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم الحارث بن نوفل على بعض أعمال مكة ثم ولاه أبو بكر و عمر و عثمان مكة إلخ
Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam appointed Harith ibn Nawfal to oversee few aspects of Makkah. Thereafter, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman appointed him as governor of Makkah.
فاستعمله على بعض عمله بمكة و أقره أبو بكر و عمر و عثمان ثم انتقل إلى البصرة و مات بها في آخر خلافة عثمان
Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam designated to him some of the state affairs in Makkah. Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman maintained this. He then relocated to Basrah and passed away there towards the ending of ‘Uthman’s Caliphate.
Reports from hadith compilations will now be reproduced to prove the above headings. People with sound natures will ponder deeply over these matters and very easily realise the correctness and worthiness of the ‘Uthmani Caliphate.
a. ‘Abdul Razzaq in al Musannaf and al Bayhaqi and al Sunan al Kubra report this incident:
هشام بن عروة يحدث عن أبيه قال أتى عبد الله بن جعفر الزبير فقال إني ابتعت بيعا بكذا و كذا و إن عليا يريد أن يأتي عثمان فيسأله أن يحجر علي فقال له الزبير فأنا شريك في البيع فأتى علي عثمان فقال له إن ابن جعفر ابتاع كذا و كذا فاحجر عليه فقال الزبير أنا شريكه في البيع فقال عثمان كيف أحجر على رجل في بيع شريكه الزبير
Hisham ibn ‘Urwah narrates―from his father who says:
‘Abdullah ibn Jafar approached Zubair and said, “I made a purchase for so much. ‘Ali now wants to go to ‘Uthman and ask him to declare me legally incompetent.”
Zubair said to him, “I am a partner in the deal.”
‘Ali approached ‘Uthman and told him, “Jafar’s son made a deal for so much, so put restrictions on him.”
Zubair said, “I am his partner in the deal.”
‘Uthman submitted, “How can I put restrictions on the deal of a man whose partner is Zubair?”
b. The second incident is recorded in Imam Malik’s magnum opus al Muwatta’. Ibn Abi Shaybah and Sa’id ibn Mansur have also recorded it:
عن محمد بن يحيى بن حبان قال كانت عند جدي حبان امرأتان هاشمية و أنصارية فطلق الأنصارية و هي ترضع فمرت بها سنة ثم هلك و لم يحض فقالت أنا أرثه لم أحض فاختصما إلى عثمان بن عفان فقضى لها بالميراث فلامت الهاشمية عثمان فقال هذا عمل ابن عمك هو أشار علينا بهذا يعني علي بن أبي طالب
Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Hibban reports:
My grandfather, Hibban, had two wives, a Hashimi woman and an Ansari woman. The latter would breastfeed infants. He divorced her, and passed away after a year. She did not yet get her menstrual periods so she claimed, “I inherit from him as I did not yet get my menstrual periods.”
They took their dispute to ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan who passed judgement in her favour that she will inherit. The Hashimi woman criticised ‘Uthman for this who responded, “This is the practice of your paternal cousin (i.e. ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib.) He instructed us to pass this verdict.”
Note: The name of this Hashimi woman is Hind bint Rabi’ah ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib. Her biography appears in al Isti’ab and al Isabah. This incident appears there as well. It also appears in Usd al Ghabah in the biography of Hind ibn Rabi’ah ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib.
The Shia scholars have also mentioned this incident in their books after editing it to suit their fancy. Have a look at al Manaqib.
c. Once, a dispute broke out between Sayyidina ‘Aqil ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu and his wife Fatimah bint ‘Utbah. She became upset with her husband and took her complaint to Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It appears in the narration:
فشدت عليها ثيابها فجاءت عثمان فذكرت ذلك له فضحك فأرسل إلى ابن عباس و معاوية فقال ابن عباس لأفرقن بينهما فقال معاوية ما كنت لأفرق بين شيخين من بني عبد مناف فأتيا فوجداهما قد أغلقا عليهما أبوابهما و أصلحا أمرهما فرجعا
She covered herself with her hijab and at once resorted to ‘Uthman and explained to him her grievance. He laughed and referred the case to Ibn ‘Abbas and Muawiyah. Ibn ‘Abbas said, “I will definitely separate them.”
Muawiyah on the other hand said, “It is not appropriate for me to separate two elderly people from the Banu ‘Abd Manaf.”
The two men came to their house but found that husband and wife had locked their doors and reached a compromise. They thus returned.
d. The following incident appears in Musannaf ‘Abdul Razzaq in the chapters of divorce:
عن أيوب قال كتب الوليد إلى الحجاج أن سل من قبلك عن المفقود إذا جاء و قد تزوجت امرأته فسأل الحجاج أبا مليح بن أسامة فقال أبو مليح حدثتني بنيهمة بنت عمر الشيبانية أنها فقدت زوجها في غزوة غزاها فلم تدر أهلك أم لا فتربصت أربع سنين ثم تزوجت فجاء زوجها الأول و قد تزوجت قالت فركب زوجاي إلى عثمان فوجداه محصورا فسألاه و ذكرا له أمرهما فقال عثمان أعلى هذا الحال قالا قد وقع و لا بد قال فخير الأول بين امرأته و بين صداقها قال فلم يلبث أن قتل عثمان فركبا بعد حتى أتيا عليا بالكوفة فسألاه فقال أعلى هذه الحال قالا قد كان ما ترى و لا بد من القول فيه قالت و أخبراه بقضاء عثمان فقال ما أرى لهما إلا ما قال عثمان فاختار الأول الصداق قالت فأعنت زوجي الآخر بألفين كان الصداق أربعة آلاف
Walid wrote to Hajjaj to ask those around him about a person who went missing and subsequently returns only to find that his wife has remarried. Hajjaj asked Abu Malih ibn Usamah.
Abu Malih said, “Bunayhamah bint ‘Umar al Shaybaniyyah narrated to me that she lost her husband in a battle he joined. She was unaware whether he died or not. She waited for four years and then remarried. Thereafter, her first husband returned.
She related, ‘My husband rode to ‘Uthman and found him besieged. They explained to him their situation and asked his verdict.
‘Uthman asked, “In this state?”
They submitted, “This is what really happened and a decision is necessary.”
He told the first husband to choose between his wife and her dowry. It was not long before ‘Uthman was martyred. They thus rode to ‘Ali in Kufah and asked him.
He said, “In this state?”
They submitted, “What you heard has actually transpired and a decision is necessary.” They also informed him of ‘Uthman’s decision.
He said, “I pass the same judgement as ‘Uthman.”
The first husband chose the dowry.
She says, “I assisted my second husband with 2000. The dowry was 4000 in total.”
A few aspects will be mentioned under this heading. The friendly interactions and amicable relationship between Sayyidina ‘Uthman Dhu al Nurayn radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the senior Hashimi gentlemen will be discussed.
Just as Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu is the paternal uncle of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he is the paternal uncle of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He is one of the most senior personalities of the Banu Hashim. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam revered him to the highest degree and was ever conscious of his status. It appears in the books of hadith:
و قد كان رسول الله يجله و يعظمه و ينزله منزلة الوالد من الولد و يقول هذا بقية آبائي
Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would revere and venerate him and hold him in the position of a father. He would say, “This is the remainder of my forefathers.”
In emulation of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the noble Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum also respected and held Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu in high esteem.
It is reported about Sayyidina ‘Umar and Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhuma:
إن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه و عثمان بن عفان كانا إذا مر بالعباس و هما راكبان ترجلا إكراما له
When ‘Umar ibn al Khattab or ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan would pass by ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib while they were mounted, they would alight and begin to walk out of honour for him.”
Once during the Caliphate of Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu, a person humiliated Sayyidina ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Sayyidina ‘Uthman had him punished for this despicable act. The incident appears in Tarikh al Tabari and Kanz al ‘Ummal:
عن القاسم بن محمد قال كان مما أحدث عثمان فرضي به منه أنه ضرب رجلا في منازعة اسختف فيها بالعباس بن عبد المطلب فقيل له فقال أيفخم رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم عمه و أرخص في الاستخفاف به لقد خالف رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم من رضي فعل ذلك فرضي به منه
Qasim ibn Muhammad says:
One of the revolutions of ‘Uthman which was authorised is that he whipped a man who disrespected ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib in an argument. ‘Uthman was asked as to why he acted in such a way. He answered, “Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on one hand has extreme veneration for his paternal uncle and me on the other hand show leniency when he is disrespected? Whoever is pleased with this action has acted contrary to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.” This action of ‘Uthman was endorsed.
Ibn ‘Abdul Barr in al Isti’ab and Ibn Kathir in al Bidayah wa al Nihayah record this event:
توفي العباس بالمدينة يوم الجمعة لاثنتي عشرة ليلة خلت من رجب و قيل بل من رمضان سنة اثنتين و ثلاثين قبل قتل عثمان رضي الله عنه بسنتين و صلى عليه عثمان رضي الله عنه و دفن بالبقيع و هو ابن ثمان و ثمانين سنة
‘Abbas passed away in Madinah on Friday, the 12th of Rajab―It is said: Ramadan―32 A.H. two years prior to the martyrdom of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu. ‘Uthman performed Salat al Janazah upon him and he was buried in al Baqi’. He passed away at the age of 88.
Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah’s mother, Khawla bint Jafar ibn Qais, was from the Banu Hanifah tribe. She was amongst the captives of the Battle of Yamamah who were sent to Madinah. Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu gifted her to Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah passed away in the beginning of Muharram 81 A.H. at the age of 65. The khalifah at the time was ‘Abdul Malik ibn Marwan and his governor over Madinah was Aban ibn ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. When his bier was brought, Aban ibn ‘Uthman arrived. Muhammad’s sons, Abu Hashim, ‘Abdullah, and others who were present, addressed him:
نحن نعلم أن الإمام أولى بالصلوة و لولا ذلك ما قدمناك فقال زيد بن السائب هكذا سمعت أبا هاشم يقول فتقدم فصلى عليه
We know that the Imam is more deserving to lead the salah. Had this not been the case, we would not have put you forward.
Zaid ibn al Sa’ib says, “This is what I heard Abu Hashim say.”
Accordingly, Aban went forward and led the Salat al Janazah.
We feel it appropriate to remind the readers at this juncture of a ruling discussed previously. In Islam, the Amir al Mu’minin or the ruler of the time has the right to lead the Salat al Janazah just as ‘Ali’s grandson, the son of Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah, has confirmed here. Alternatively, that person may lead the Salat al Janazah who has been given permission by the ruler. In compliance to this shar’i ruling, Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq―and no one else―offered the Salat al Janazah for Sayyidah Fatimah al Zahra’ radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. Wherever the contrary appears, it is only the speculation of the narrator which is rejected in the presence of this shar’i ruling unanimously accepted by both sects. A detailed discussion of this issue appeared previously in the Siddiqi section of this book while discussing Sayyidah Fatimah’s radiya Llahu ‘anha janazah. Kindly refer to it.
Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhuma is the nephew of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu as well as his son-in-law. He is one of the renowned figures of the Banu Hashim and a man of righteousness. Majority of historians agree that he passed away in Madinah in 80 A.H. The governor over Madinah at the time from the side of the khalifah ‘Abdul Malik was Aban ibn ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan. When ‘Abdullah passed away, Aban ibn ‘Uthman led his Salat al Janazah. This happened the same year Makkah was struck with a huge flood which washed away camels laden with goods. It is called the year of al Jahaf (ruin).
Like the other Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, the Hashimis supported Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu at every step of his Caliphate. They assisted and backed one another at every juncture. There was no trace of tribal prejudice or mutual bias among them. A few incidents will now be reproduced which prove the participation of Sayyidina ‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu sons (Sayyidina Hassan and Sayyidina Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma) as well as his nephews and cousins and other Hashimis in Jihad expeditions.
فاستشار عثمان من عنده من الصحابة فأشار أكثرهم بذلك فجهز إليه العساكر من المدينة و فيهم جماعة من أعيان الصحابة منهم عبد الله بن العباس و غيره فسار بهم عبد الله بن سعد إلى أفريقة فلما وصلوا إلى برقة لقيهم عقبة بن نافع فيمن معه من المسلمين
‘Uthman consulted the Sahabah who were by him [regarding attacking Tripoli and North West Africa]. Majority of them gave him the go ahead. As a result, he mobilised forces from Madinah for the mission. A group of distinguished Sahabah, inter alia, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, etc. were in the forces. ‘Abdullah ibn Sa’d travelled with them to Africa. When they reached Barqah, ‘Uqbah ibn Nafi’ and the Muslims with him met them.
ثم لما ولي عبد الله بن أبي سرح استأذن عثمان في ذلك و استمده فاستشار عثمان الصحابة فأشاروا به فجهز العساكر من المدينة و فيهم جماعة من الصحابة منهم ابن عباس و ابن عمر و ابن عمرو بن العاص و ابن جعفر والحسن و الحسين و ابن الزبير و ساروا مع عبد الله ابن أبي سرح سنة ست و عشرين و لقيهم عقبة بن نافع فيمن معه من المسلمين ببرقة ثم ساروا إلى طرابلس فتهيوا الروم عندها ثم ساروا إلى أفريقية و بثوا السرايا كل ناحية
When ‘Abdullah (ibn Sa’d) ibn Abi Sarh was appointed as the governor of Egypt, he requested ‘Uthman permission to send troops [towards Tripoli and the other parts of North West Africa.] ‘Uthman in turn consulted with the senior Sahabah, who forwarded their opinion that they should be given permission to go ahead.
An army was prepared in Madinah which comprised of a group of Sahabah, inter alia, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar, Hassan, Hussain, and ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair.
This army, under the leadership of ‘Abdullah (ibn Sa’d) ibn Abi Sarh, set out in 26 A.H and met up with ‘Uqbah ibn Nafi’ and his group of Muslims at a place called Barqah. They all proceeded towards Tripoli and engaged with the Romans there. Thereafter, they proceeded to [North West] Africa and sent detachments in every direction.
Note: Some historians have recorded this under the events of the year 27 A.H. Khalifah ibn Khayyat has done the same.
After a few years, the Muslim army advanced from Kufah under the leadership of Sa’id ibn al ‘As al Umawi in the year 30 A.H. to Khurasan, Tabristan, and Jurjan. Senior Hashimis participated in these expeditions and remained in Jihad for a long period. They conquered territory after territory, took their share from the booty, and returned safely.
Ibn Jarir al Tabari, Ibn Athir al Jazari, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn Khaldun have recorded these happenings in their books with their respective wordings.
عن حنش بن مالك قال غزا سعيد بن العاص من الكوفة سنة 30 يريد خراسان و معه حذيفة بن اليمان و ناس من أصحاب رسول الله و معه الحسن و الحسين و عبد الله بن العباس و عبد الله بن عمر و عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص و عبد الله بن الزبير
Hanash ibn Malik reports:
Sa’id ibn al ‘As advanced from Kufah in the year 30 A.H. towards Khurasan. Hudhayfah ibn al Yaman and other Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were with him. Hassan, Hussain, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, and ‘Abdullah ibn al Zubair accompanied him.
فإن سعيدا غزاها من الكوفة سنة ثلاثين و معه الحسن و الحسين و ابن عباس و ابن عمر بن الخطاب و عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص و حذيفة بن اليمان و ابن الزبير و ناس من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم
Sa’id attacked it from Kufah the year 30 A.H. Hassan, Hussain, Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn ‘Umar ibn al Khattab, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, Hudhayfah ibn al Yaman, Ibn Zubair, and a number of other Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam joined him.
ذكر المادائني أن سعيد بن العاص ركب في جيش فيه الحسن والحسين و العبادلة الاربعة و حذيفة بن اليمان في خلق من الصحابة و سار بهم فمر على بلدان شتى يصالحونه على أموال جزيلة حتى انتهى إلى بلد معاملة جرجان فقاتلوه حتى احتاجوا إلى صلوة الخوف
Al Mada’ini records that Sa’id ibn al ‘As al Umawi (who at that time was the governor of Kufah appointed by Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu), proceeded with an army which comprised of Hassan, Hussain, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al ‘As, ‘Abdullah ibn Zubair, Hudhayfah ibn al Yaman, and scores of other Sahabah. They passed many territories and cities where peace treaties were signed in lieu of a handsome amount of wealth, until they finally reached Jurjan. At Jurjan a fierce battle ensued in which they were compelled to perform Salat al Khawf.
In the year 32 A.H. during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate, Sa’id ibn al ‘As al Umawi led the Muslim army to Balanjar. The inhabitants of Balanjar coupled with the Turks attacked the Muslim forces with full fury and the battle raged. Ibn Kathir continues:
فقتل يومئذ عبد الرحمن بن ربيعة كان يقال له ذو النور و انهزم المسلمون فافترقوا فرقتين ففرقة ذهبت إلى بلاد الخزر و فرقة سلكوا ناحية جيلان و جرجان و في هؤلاء أبو هريرة و سلمان الفارسي رضي الله عنهما
‘Abdul Rahman ibn Rabi’ah (a distinguished Muslim) was martyred on that day. He was called Dhu al Nur (full of light). The Muslims faced a (temporary) defeat. So they separated into two groups. One group went to the land of Khazr while the other group took the road to Jilan and Jurjan. Abu Hurairah and Salman al Farisi radiya Llahu ‘anhuma were in the second group.
The books of history are replete with incidents of this nature of participation in jihad. Senior and prominent Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum continued to participate in expeditions during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate. In the above incident, popular personalities like Sayyidina Abu Hurairah and Sayyidina Salman al Farisi radiya Llahu ‘anhuma participated.
Sayyidina Salman al Farisi radiya Llahu ‘anhu is that individual who in the light of Shia traditions always acted in accordance to the desire and pleasure of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He never conducted a practical program without his consultation. He was from the special devotees of Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
What we wish to indicate is that just as Hashimis participated in the jihad expedition during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate, their partisans also put their shoulders to the wheel by practically participating in jihad, understanding it to be a noble act of worship.
One of Sayyidina ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu sons is Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas. The scholars write:
معبد بن العباس بن عبد المطلب بن هاشم القرشي الهاشمي يكنى أبا العباس ولد على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم و لم يحفظ عنه قتل بأفريقية شهيدا سنة خمس و ثلاثين في زمن عثمان رضي الله عنه و كان قد غزاها مع ابن أبي سرح و أمه أم الفضل لبابة بنت الحارث أخت ميمونة زوج النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم
Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib ibn Hashim al Qurashi al Hashimi. His agnomen is Abu al ‘Abbas. He was born during the lifetime of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam but did not memorise any hadith from him. He was killed as a martyr in Africa in 35 A.H during the reign of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He attacked it with Ibn Abi Sarh. His mother is Umm al Fadl Lubabah bint al Harith, the sister of Maimunah, Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wife.
Note: Other historians like al Baladhuri in Futuh al Buldan say it took place prior to the year 35 A.H.
Beloved readers, these historical facts have revealed that during the ‘Uthmani reign, there existed no tribal racism between the Hashimis and Umawis. Tribal worship and family distinction was not their concern. They worked together with unity so that the word of Allah may reign supreme and participated in jihad to spread Islam.
The monetary rights of the family of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were taken care of during his blessed era from the khums, produce of Fadak, booty from other conquests, and stipends. Thereafter, Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu looked after their well-being according to the prophetic system and so did Sayyidina ‘Umar al Faruq radiya Llahu ‘anhu during their respective eras. We have provided sufficient evidence from books of both sects for the above in the Siddiqi and Faruqi sections of this book.
Now comes the ‘Uthmani Caliphate. We felt it appropriate to discuss the fulfilment of their monetary rights during it so that the respected readers are rest assured that Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu also fulfilled their rights in the correct prophetic manner. None of the three khulafa’ usurped or trampled their rights. Rather, they continued giving them stipends and allowances from the captured booty.
The Muslims are unanimous upon the fact that the three khulafa’ were just and impartial, not usurpers or oppressors. Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not allow oppression on any individual. Fairness was his salient quality. He regarded fulfilling the rights of those deserving his responsibility. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala admires this quality of the Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in the glorious Qur’an:
يَبْتَغُوْنَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا
Seeking bounty from Allah and [His] approval.
These personalities carried out those acts which earned Allah’s subhanahu wa ta ‘ala pleasure and remained distant from those actions that incurred His wrath. After the emphatic words of the Qur’an have been presented, we now wish to display some texts established on the pages of Islamic history which support the primary subject under discussion. Firstly, relevant texts from our books will be presented to the readers followed by snippets from Shia books for corroboration.
قدم سعيد بن العاص المدينة وافدا على عثمان فبعث إلى وجوه المهاجرين و الأنصار بصلات و كسى و بعث إلى علي بن أبي طالب أيضا فقبل ما بعث إليه
Sa’id ibn al ‘As came to Madinah to meet ‘Uthman. He sent gifts and garments to the distinguished Muhajirin and Ansar. He also sent gifts for ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib who accepted what was sent to him.
فقال (عثمان) لابن عامر قبح الله رأيك أترسل إلى علي بثلاثة آلاف درهم قال كرهت أن أغرق و لم أدر ما رأيك قال فأغرق قال فبعث إليه بعشرين ألف درهم و ما يتبعها قال فراح علي إلى المسجد فانتهى إلى حلقته و هم يتذاكرون صلات ابن عامر هذا الحي من قريش فقال علي هو سيد فتيان قريش غير مدافع
‘Uthman told Ibn ‘Amir, “Your view was dishonourable! You sent only 3000 dirhams to ‘Ali?”
He submitted, “I disliked favouring one above another and I was unaware of your opinion.”
‘Uthman commanded, “Give more to him.”
Accordingly, he sent 20 000 dirhams to ‘Ali coupled with other presents.
Thereafter ‘Ali came to the Masjid and approached a circle who were speaking about the gifts of Ibn ‘Amir to the Quraysh tribe. ‘Ali announced, “He is the leader of the youth of the Quraysh, without dispute.”
عن سحيم بن حفص قال كان ربيعة بن الحارث بن عبد المطلب شريك عثمان في الجاهلية فقال العباس بن ربيعة لعثمان اكتب لي ابن عامر يسلفني مائة ألف فكتب فأعطاه مائة ألف و صله بها و اقطعه داره دار العباس بن ربيعة اليوم
Suhaym ibn Hafs relates:
Rabi’ah ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib was ‘Uthman’s business partner in the time of jahiliyyah. ‘Abbas ibn Rabi’ah (his son) submitted before ‘Uthman, “Write to Ibn ‘Amir (governor of Basrah) to lend me 100 000 dirhams. Moreover, I need a house to stay in.” Accordingly, ‘Uthman wrote to Ibn ‘Amir who gave ‘Abbas 100 000 dirhams and allocated a land to him which is known right up to today as the house of ‘Abbas ibn Rabi’ah.
Sayyidina ‘Uthman’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu maternal cousin ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amir ibn Kurayz was one of the main strategisers in the conquest of Khurasan. He conquered the area and obtained a handsome booty. Two daughters of the king of that area Yazdegerd were taken as captive as part of the spoils of war. Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu gifted them to Sayyidina Hassan and Sayyidina Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. This entire incident has been reported by Shia scholars from the tongue of Imam ‘Ali al Rida rahimahu Llah. We will now quote some supporting texts from their books considered reliable by them which corroborates the focus of our discussion.
The Shia scholar, ‘Abdullah al Mamaqani, writes in his book, Tanqih al Maqal:
عن سهل بن القاسم البوشنجاني قال قال لي الرضا بخراسان إن بيننا و بينكم نسبا قلت ما هو أيها الأمير قال إن عبد الله بن عامر بن كريز لما افتتح خراسان أصاب ابنتين ليزدجرد بن شهريار ملك الأعاجم فبعث بهما إلى عثمان بن عفان فوهب إحداهما للحسن و الأخرى للحسين فماتتا عندهما نفساوين و كانت صاحبة الحسين نفست بعلي بن الحسين عليهما السلام
Sahl ibn al Qasim al Bushanjani narrates, “‘Ali al Rida told me once while we were in Khurasan that we are relatives to each other. I asked him, ‘How is that so?’
‘Ali al Rida replied, ‘When ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amir (Sayyidina ‘Uthman’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu cousin) conquered Khurasan, two daughters of the king, Yazdegerd ibn Shahriyar, fell into the Muslim hands as booty. He sent them to ‘Uthman, who gifted one to Hassan and the other to Hussain. Both of them bore children for Hassan and Hussain and passed away while being married to them. The girl who was the wife of Hussain gave birth to ‘Ali ibn al Hussain (Zayn al ‘Abidin).’”
In Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, Ibn Maytham al Bahrani has brought a lengthy discussion under the text:
بلى كانت في أيدينا فدك
Definitely, Fadak was is our possession.
He enumerates 18 themes. Under theme 8, he reports this incident which discusses the dialogue between Sayyidah Fatimah and Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhuma over Fadak:
كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم يأخذ من فدك قوتكم و يقسم الباقي يحمل منه في سبيل الله و لك على الله أن أصنع بها كما كان يصنع فرضيت بذلك و أخذت العهد عليه به و كان يأخذ غلتها فيدفع إليهم منها ما يكفيهم ثم فعلت الخلفاء بعده كذلك
Abu Bakr explained, “Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would take your expenses from Fadak and distribute and spend the rest in the path of Allah. You have my word in Allah’s name that I will do just as your father did.”
She was pleased with this and took a covenant from him upon it. He would take its produce and give them what was sufficient for them. Thereafter, the khulafa’ after him acted in the very same way.
After presenting texts from two books the Shia consider reliable, I felt it necessary to present another Shia reference since in this text, Ibn Abi al Hadid Shia listed the khulafa’ by name. He acknowledges:
كان أبو بكر يأخذ غلتها و يدفع إليهم منها ما يكفيهم و يقسم الباقي و كان عمر كذلك ثم كان عثمان كذلك ثم كان علي كذلك
Abu Bakr would take its produce and give them what was sufficient for them and distribute the rest (among the needy). ‘Umar did the same. Thereafter, ‘Uthman did the same. And thereafter, ‘Ali did the same.
Sayed ‘Ali Naqi Fayd al Islam―the renowned Shia scholar of the 14th century―has mentioned the above in his Persian commentary of Nahj al Balaghah in the following words:
خلاصہ ابو بکر غلہ و سودآں گرفتہ بقدر کفایت باہل بیت علیہم السلام میداد و خلفاء بعد از وہم برآں اسلوب رفتار نمودند
Abu Bakr would give a sufficient amount of the produce of Fadak to the Ahlul Bayt rahimahu Llah and the khulafa’ after him maintained this practice.
All the incidents in chapter four are glimpses of the friendly interactions and amicable relationship between Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Sayyidina ‘Ali and the Hashimis radiya Llahu ‘anhum. The following points are established:
فاروق ظل جاہ و جلال محمد است
صدیق عکس حسن کمال محمد است
حیدر بہار باغ خصال محمد است
عثماں ضیاء شمع جمال محمد است
بو بکر و عمر عثمان و علی
ہیں کرنیں ایک ہی مشعل کی
کچہ فرق نہیں ان چاروں میں
ہم مشرب ہیں یاران نبی
Siddiq is the reflection of Muhammad’s superb excellence.
Faruq is the shadow of Muhammad’s awe and glory.
‘Uthman is the shining light of Muhammad’s beauty.
Haydar is the blooming garden of Muhammad’s characteristics.
They are rays of the same light.
Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali.
The friends of the Nabi are from the same fountain.
There is no difference in these four.
 Al Sunan al Kubra, vol. 10 pg. 112, book on the protocol of the judge, chapter on the one who consults.
 Qurb al Isnad, pg. 133, chapter on the blood money of a Hashimi woman and others, Tehran print.
 Kanz al ‘Ummal, vol. 3 pg. 7102, Hadith: 1875, first print, Dakkan
 Sahih al Bukhari, vol. 1 pg. 522, chapter on the merits of ‘Uthman.
 Furu’ al Kafi, vol. 3 pg. 117, chapter on the compulsory punishment for drinking, Nawl Kashawr print, Lucknow; al Manaqib, vol. 2 pg. 120, section on his readiness with determination and abandonment of leniency, India print; Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, vol. 4 pg. 267, mention of Walid’ actions making him deserving of punishment and banishment. Beirut print; Tarikh Ya’qubi, vol. 2 pg. 165, Beirut print.
 Furu’ al Kafi, vol. 3 pg. 117, chapter on the compulsory punishment for drinking, Nawl Kashawr print, Lucknow.
 Answers to the criticisms against Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
 Musnad Ahmed with selections of Kanz al ‘Ummal, vol. 1 pg. 104, the musnadat of ‘Ali, Egypt print.
 Majma’ al Zawa’id, vol. 6 pg. 272, with reference to al Tabarani, chapter on the reports on homosexuality; Kanz al ‘Ummal, vol. 3 pg. 99, Hadith: 1830, with reference to al Tabarani, old print, first edition.
 Furu’ al Kafi, vol. 3 pg. 175, chapter regarding and for wounds is legal retribution, Nawl Kashawr print, Lucknow.
 Al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 3 pg. 366, the biography of Mughirah ibn Nawfal al Qurashi al Hashimi; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 4 pg. 408, the biography of Mughirah ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib ibn Hashim; al Isabah with al Isti’ab, vol. 3 pg. 433, the biography of Mughirah ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith.
 Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 5 pg. 15, ‘Abdullah ibn al Harith ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib ibn Hashim; Tahdhib al Tahdhib, vol. 5 pg. 15, ‘Abdullah ibn al Harith.
 Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 4 pg. 39, section 1, Harith ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith.
 Al Isabah, vol. 1 pg. 292, Harith ibn Nawfal ibn al Harith.
 Musannaf ‘Abdul Razzaq, vol. 8 pg. 267, 268, chapter on the insolvent and restrictions on him; al Sunan al Kubra, vol. 6 pg. 61, same chapter.
 Muwatta’ Malik, pg. 208, chapter of the divorce of the ill, Mujtaba’i print, Delhi; Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, vol. 5 pg. 210, chapter on the verdict given regarding a man who divorces his wife and then her hayd stops, Hyderabad print, Dakkan; Kitab al Sunan, pg. 308, first section of volume 3, Majlis ‘Ilmi, Dabhel; Mu’atta’ Muhammad, pg. 269, old Mustafa’i print.
 Al Manaqib, vol. 3 pg. 13, ‘Ali’s judgements in the third era, India print.
 Musannaf ‘Abdul Razzaq, vol. 6 pg. 513, Majlis ‘Ilmi print; al Isabah, vol. 4 pg. 372, Fatimah bint ‘Utbah.
 Musannaf ‘Abdul Razzaq, vol. 7 pg. 88, 89, chapter on the wife who is not sure of her husband’s demise.
 Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 7 pg. 161, mention of ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib, year 32 A.H.
 Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 7 pg. 162, mention of ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib, year 32 A.H.; al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 3 pg. 98, biography of ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib; Tahdhib al Tahdhib, vol. 5 pg. 123, same chapter.
 Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 5 pg. 136, mention of some of characteristics of ‘Uthman; Kitab al Tamhid wa al Bayan fi Maqtal al Shahid ‘Uthman, pg. 85, 86; Kanz al ‘Ummal, vol. 7 pg. 69, book on virtues, mention of ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib, first edition.
 Al Isti’ab, vol. 3 pg. 100, biography of ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 7 pg. 162, mention of ‘Abbas, year 32 A.H.
 Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 5 pg. 86, biography of Muhammad ibn al Hanafiyyah, Leiden print.
 Al Isti’ab with al Isabah, vol. 2 pg. 267, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 3 pg. 135, biography of ‘Abdullah; al Isabah with al Isti’ab, vol. 2 pg. 281, biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Jafar al Tayyar.
 Al Kamil, vol. 3 pg. 45, year 26 A.H., Egypt print.
 Tarikh ibn Khaldun, vol. 2 pg. 1003, under the heading leadership of ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Sarh over Egypt and the conquest of Africa.
 Tarikh Khalifah ibn Khayyat, vol. 1 pg. 134, events of the year 27 A.H.
 Tarikh al Umam wa al Muluk, vol. 5 pg. 57, events of the year 30 A.H., old Egypt print.
 Al Kamil, vol. 3 pg. 54, the Battle of Tabristan.
 Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 7 pg. 154, year 30 A.H.; Tarikh ibn Khaldun, vol. 2 pg. 1018, Battle of Tabristan, Beirut print.
 Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 5 pg. 78, year 32 A.H., old Egypt print; al Kamil, vol. 3 pg. 66, year 32 A.H., Egypt print; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol. 7 pg. 160, year 32 A.H., Egypt print.
 Al Isti’ab, vol. 3 pg. 436, 437, Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas; al Isabah, vol. 3 pg. 457, Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas; Usd al Ghabah, vol. 4 pg. 392, Ma’bad ibn al ‘Abbas; Futuh al Buldan, pg. 234, conquest of Africa, first edition, Egypt.
 Surah al Hashr: 8.
 Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 5 pg. 21, Sa’id ibn al ‘As.
 Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, vol. 5 pg. 33, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amir, Leiden print.
 Tarikh al Tabari, vol. 5 pg. 138, 139, 35 A.H., list of some of the characteristics of ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan, Egypt print.
 It may be objected that this incident of Shahrbanu has been mentioned in the Faruqi section of this book while discussing the conquests and booty of Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Its mention here in the conquests of Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu seems to be a contradiction. It is sufficient to mention at this juncture that we have only quoted the statements of Shia scholars as proof against them. If this is a contradiction, then the onus rests upon their scholars to explain. We are only transmitters. These are the statements of their infallible Imams. If they deem it appropriate, they should clarify the matter. It does not change our proof against them. If the incident of Shahrbanu took place during the Faruqi Caliphate, then it is okay. If it occurred during the ‘Uthmani Caliphate, then it is also fine. Our object is simple, to prove that the second and third khalifah fulfilled the monetary rights of the Banu Hashim from the booty and did not usurp their rights and that they enjoyed an amicable relationship. This is our purpose.
 Tanqih al Maqal fi ‘Ilm al Rijal, vol. 3 pg. 80, section of women, chapter on Sin and Shin, Shahrbanu, Tehran print.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, vol. 5 pg. 107, theme 8, mention of Fadak, new Tehran print; al Durrah al Najafiyyah, pg. 332, mention of Fadak, old Iran print.
 Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, vol. 4 pg. 111, chapter on what Abu Bakr did with Fadak and what he said about it, Beirut print.
 Tarjamah wa Sharh Farisi Nahj al Balaghah, vol. 5 pg. 960, under the text: definitely, Fadak was in our possession from all the sky covers, Tehran print.