The sincerity, piety and nobility of the first four khulafaʼ are demonstrated by their abstinence from the wealth that flowed from the newly conquered lands of the former Persian and Byzantine empires to the metropolis of Islam. Unlike other ambitious conquerors, they did not lead a life of ease and sufficiency but preferred to pass their days as recluses — simple, austere and frugal — like the great Master. It would be rather more appropriate to say that they enjoyed greater contentment and peace of mind before they accepted the responsibility of presiding over the Islamic empire.
The way these khulafaʼ passed their days amidst power and prestige of the greatest empire of the time has made Edward Gibbon to concede that:
The courage of Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman had indeed been tried in the persecution and wars of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; and the personal assurance of paradise must have taught them to despise the pleasure and dangers of the present world. But they ascended the throne in a vulnerable and mature age, and esteemed the domestic curse of religion and justice, the most important duties of the sovereign… The austere and frugal measure of their lives was the effect of virtue or habit, and the pride of their simplicity insulted the vain magnificence of the kings of the earth.
None of them ever tried to pass on his heritage to his son or a member of his family; they kept their near and dear ones away from the strings of power and sometimes even bade the electorate not to choose them as their successors. Of what we know of human nature and the propensities and practices followed by kings since times immemorial lead us to the conclusion that the khulafaʼ were absolutely sincere, free from human failings like self-indulgence, nepotism or partiality, their sole purpose in holding the helm was to propagate faith and strengthen the commonwealth committed to their care, and to save the nascent state against all internal and external dangers.
Had they been self-seeking, desirous of winning power and prestige, they would not have shunned the pomp and circumstances of a rapidly expanding state. Endowed with sovereign and absolute power, if they chose to maintain the simple and frugal life as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did, they could not be accused of insincerity by any man of understanding. These khulafaʼ were too shrewd to be deceived themselves, and too honest to act the part of deceivers.
We shall recount a few episodes relating to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma which will convince any man endowed with common sense to judge for himself the veracity of these saintly successors of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The reputed historian Ibn al Kathir rahimahu Llah (1160 – 1234 A.H/1640 – 1722) relates an incident showing the conscientiousness of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
Once his wife expressed the longing for some sweetmeats. When Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu expressed his inability she offered to save something from the daily expenses of the household. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu gave his consent. She saved over a period some money and asked Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to get some sweetmeats Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu took the money but remarked: “This seems to be in excess of our needs.” And put it back in the treasury. He also cut down his stipend to that extent.
Hassan ibn ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, relates that just before his death, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu said to his daughter, ‘Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha: “The she-camel we had for milk, the pan in which we took meals and the bedspread we used were given to me since I served the Muslims. Send them to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu after I have passed away.” She sent all these things to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu as she had been bidden. Thereupon ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu remarked: “May Allah have mercy upon you, Abu Bakr. You have laid a heavy burden upon me.”
It is also related that at the first Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu continued to maintain himself by trade; but finding it interfering with the affairs of the state he consented to forego his occupation and receive a yearly allowance of six thousand dirhams for his household charges. His conscience troubled him for having taken even what he did by way of stipend from people’s money; on his death-bed, therefore, he gave command that certain lands of his private property should be sold, and a sum equal to all that he had taken refunded to the public exchequer.
Another report relates that he commanded to refund eight thousand dirhams for he had only taken that sum for his sustenance. He was wrapped in the same clothes in which he died; for he said: “New clothes befit the living, but old the mouldering body.”
The pomp and show attending royal visits are too familiar to be recounted here. The man reigning over the most powerful empire in the sixth century A.D. had also an occasion to undertake a journey to Jerusalem for capitulation of that city in 16 A.H/1636 A.D. After a siege of some duration the patriarch sued for peace, but refused to surrender the place to anyone but the Khalifah in person. As Amir ‘Ali says ‘Umar “acceded to the request, and travelling with a single attendant, without escort and without any pomp and ceremony arrived at Jabia.” We shall relate the subsequent part of the journey as narrated by William Muir from the original sources:
It was a memorable occasion, being the first progress of a Caliph beyond the limits of Arabia, Abu ‘Ubaidah, Yazid, and Khalid, came from the north in state to welcome him. A brilliant cavalcade, robed in Syrian brocade, and mounted on steeds richly caparisoned, they rode forth as he approached. At the sight of all this finery, ‘Umar‘s spirit was stirred within him. He stooped down, and, gathering a handful of gravel, flung it at the astonished chiefs. “Alas!” he cried; “Is it in this attire that you come out to meet me? All changed thus in the space of two short years! Verily, even if it had been after two hundred, you would have deserved to be degraded.”
… Dismissing the other generals to their respective commands, the Caliph, carrying with him ‘Amr and Shurahbil, resumed the journey westward, and, crossing the Jordan below the Lake of Tiberius, proceeded thus to Jerusalem. They gave him a palfrey to ride on, which pranced with jingling bells after the fashion of Syria. He disliked the motion. “What ailed the animal?” he said; “I know not who has taught you this strange gait.” So he dismounted and rode upon his own horse again.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu undertook another journey to Syria in 18 A.H /639 A.D. He asked ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu to deputise in his place in Madinah on this occasion.
His way lay through the Christian settlement of Ayla, at the head of the gulf of Acaba. The reception he met with here brings out well the simplicity of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and his kindly feeling towards the Christians. He journeyed on a camel with small pomp or following; and as he was minded to enter the village unrecognised, he changed places with his servant.
“Where is the Amir?” cried the eager crowds as they streamed forth from the villages to witness the Caliphs advent. “He is before you”, replied ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and he drove his camel on. So they hurried forward, thinking that the great Caliph was beyond, and left ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu to alight unobserved at the house of the bishop, with whom he lodged during the heat of the day. His coat, which had been rant upon the journey, he gave to his host to mend. This the bishop not only did, but had a garment made for him of a material lighter and more suited to the oppressive travel of the season. ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, however, preferred to wear his own.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu always co-operated with his predecessors. As Amir ‘Ali says the election of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, on the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam “was accepted with their usual devotion to the faith by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the chief members of Muhammad’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam family.”
William Muir has mentioned the misunderstanding arising between Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu on the question of inheritance of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam personal property but adds that the latter continued to frequent the Khalifah’s court like the rest of the chief Sahabah and even performed the functions of chief judicial officer.
He also says that the dispatches of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu were chiefly indicted by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
In his introduction to Nahj al Balaghah, rendered into English for the Islamic Seminary, a World Shia Muslim Organisation, ‘Askari Jafery has mentioned several instances of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu, seeking the advice of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and accepting them with gratitude.
He says that:
On the occasion of the invasion of Rome (Byzantine Empire) when ‘Umar sought his (‘Ali’s radiya Llahu ‘anhu) counsel as to the advisability of heading the army as the commander-in-chief, he advised him to be at the helm and to send some experienced general as commander… Similarly at the time of invasion of Persia he counselled the Khalifah ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu not to leave the capital and to send somebody else.
The well-meaning counsels offered by ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu finds confirmation in the sermons number 137 and 149 included in Nahj al Balaghah.
It has been mentioned elsewhere that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu left ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu as his deputy in Madinah while he travelled to Syria in 18 A.H. The sympathetic reflections of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu on the death of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu have been preserved by historians which speak volumes of his earnest grief at parting company with these venerable comrades.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu nominated ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu as one of the members of the Council charged to elect his successor. The choice of the electorate fell upon ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu and with his usual patriotism and devotion to the faith; ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu gave his adherence to ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu as soon as he was elected. When the rebels blockaded ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu, which lasted several weeks, denying food and water to the aging Khalifah, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu interposed and expostulated with the besiegers. Muir reports: “They were treating their Caliph,” he (‘Ali) told them: “More cruelly than they would treat Greek or Persian captives in the field. Even infidels did not deny water to a thirsty enemy.” But as the insurgents were deaf to his entreaty, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu sent water and food to the Khalifah during the siege and later deputed his sons and dependents to defend the Khalifah.
When ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu heard of the assassination of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu, he hastened to the place and asked his son how it happened. Death had not softened the rebels’ heart who pelted the litter of Caliph ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu with stones, but the funeral procession was bravely joined by Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhu along with the kinsmen of the departed Caliph.
The Qur’an explicitly says that the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam are:
اَشِدَّآءُ عَلَی الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَآءُ بَیْنَهُمْ
Severe against the disbelievers, merciful one to another.
The lives of the people who have had the opportunity of keeping company with Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam are a living illustration of this sententious expression. Their mutual love and compassion, their comradeship and their willingness to undergo any sacrifice for their mates, signify the truth of divine revelation about them. Amir ‘Ali has rightly remarked:
The intense faith and conviction on the part of the immediate followers of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is the noblest testimony to his sincerity and his utter self-absorption in his appointed task.
Any allegations about the improbity of these elevated souls not only belies a historical fact but also raises doubts about the truth of divine revelation and effectiveness of prophetic guidance. A report related by al Bukhari on the authority of ‘Uqba ibn al Harith says:
Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu performed the ‘asr salah and came out of the masjid to take a stroll. He saw Hassan playing with other children. He lifted him up upon his shoulder and said: “May my father be sacrificed for him; he bearsresemblance to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and not ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.” ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu heard the remark and smiled.
Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu narrates:
‘Umar once asked me why I do not go and sit with him. Later on I went to his house but nobody was allowed to go inside and his son ‘Abdullah was waiting for him outside. I came back but when he met me next, he again said: “Son you did not come to me?” I replied that I had gone to see him but he was in privy, since his son ‘Abdullah was waiting for his permission to see him. ‘Umar replied: “Never mind the permission of ‘Abdullah, you could have seen me. The faith we have was due to your household.” Thereafter he patted me on the head.
Another report handed down by Zayn-al ’Abidin ibn Hussain rahimahu Llah through Muhammad al Baqir and Jafar al Sadiq rahimahuma Llah has been narrated by Ibn Sa’d. He says:
Once ‘Umar received some hullahs from Yemen which were distributed by him among the people. Those who received the hullahs came wearing them to Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam masjid while ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was sitting half-way between the grave of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the pulpit. The in-comers saluted him and he also greeted them. In the meantime Hassan and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma happened to come out of their house (which was part of the masjid) but none of them had a hullah on him. ‘Umar looked sad and depressed. When he was asked reason for it he replied that he had been saddened because of the two children, as there was no hullah of their size; all were for the grown-ups. ‘Umar then wrote to the governor of Yemen to send two hullahs for Hassan and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu and also make haste in complying with his orders. ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was satisfied when these were received and he had both the children put them on.
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu regulated the allocation of stipends on a fixed and systematic scale. Shibli Nu’mani has described the rule of precedence laid by ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu. He writes:
‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had great regard for affinity to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. When he expressed the desire to fix the rates of stipend, ‘Abd al Rahman ibn al ’Auf radiya Llahu ‘anhu and few others expressed their opinions that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu should get precedence. However, ‘Umar disagreed with them and said that the affinity to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam should be a criterion for priority. In such wise he commenced with the Banu Hashim, and among them he began with ‘Abbas and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma at the top. He gave fifth place to his own tribe Banu ‘Adi. Thus, the names of stipendiaries were listed in that order. In the fixation of allowances too, he kept the same rule in view; those who have fought at Badr were allowed the highest allowance. Hassan and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma were exceptions for they were allocated the same amount (as those who fought at Badr) although they did not fall in that category.
‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the chief counsellor of ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu whom he always took as the most sincere and well-meaning confidant. As stated elsewhere when ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu declared his resolve to march forth in person to direct the Battle of Nahawind, it was ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu who dissuaded him from leaving Madinah. When ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu undertook the journey to Jerusalem, he asked ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu to act as his vicegerent. How dear ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu can be gauged from the fact that the former gave his daughter Umm Kulthum, by his first wife Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, in wedlock to ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu.
He also gave the names of his predecessors — Abu Bakr, ‘Umar and ‘Uthman — to three of his sons.
The social order we find portrayed in the Qur’an, hadith and reliable annals, which was groomed and brought up under the prophetic care, presents the most shinning and sublime picture of a body of men, virtuous, just, clement and noble, and who are not to be found even in a smaller number at any other time or anywhere else in the world. This, in itself, tends to show — on the one hand — the innate goodness of human nature, the heights to which man can raise his worthiness and the health of his soul and — on the other — the effective and lasting impact of the sincere pure-hearted guide that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was.
Actually these were the men of whom entire humanity can be proud of, for they were the men whom Iqbal describes as “children of earth and light, creatures with divine traits.” No man belonging to such society can ever develop an inferiority-complex, malevolence or despondency. Rather every member of such a social order becomes upward-looking, takes the Nabi of Islam as his beau ideal, and his faith in the realities, beyond the ken of human perception, turns into a living, veritable precept. Imam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahu Llah has very correctly assessed the distinguishing feature of these emblems of human virtues:
Notwithstanding the weakness which is natural to human beings, no group or clan, excepting the messengers of Allah, can as a whole, be compared to the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. If one finds minor short-comings here and there, these are like faint marks on the white cloth. It is the faults of the cavaliers who see these stains only but not the tidiness of the cloth itself. Others compared to this group would be found to be wholly blemished with only a few white spots.
An entirely different picture of these godly men is presented by a people claiming to be Muslims and swearing allegiance to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam; these are the Imamiyyah or Ithna ‘Ashariyyah (the Twelvers) whose depiction of the earliest Muslim society speaks of total failure of the prophetic guidance and training — a failure unparalleled in history. It signifies the collapse of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam efforts, not experienced even by those guides and reformers who were not commissioned by Allah for this purpose nor enjoyed His succour and blessings.
Shia portrayal of the Sahabah presents them as self-seeking hypocrites who could stoop to lies, intrigues, treachery, falsification of text, forgery and betrayal for their worldly ends. Were this depiction to be true, nobody would endeavour to reform the morals and conduct of one’s fellow beings and would yield to despair with regard to the future of all human beings.
Only three persons remained, according to their version, truly wedded to the Islamic faith after the death of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, while the rest, who had been guided, groomed and trained for twenty-three long years, recanted their faith. Were this to be correct, then nothing else would be needed to establish bankruptcy of the prophetic guidance.
An authentic religious treatise of the Shia entitled Al Jami’ al Kafi, contains the following statements of Imam Abu Jafar (also known as Imam al Baqir) in the last section given the caption of Kitab al Rowdah:
The people became apostates after Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with the exception of three persons. (The narrator) asked: “Who were those three?” He said: “Miqdad ibn al Aswad, Abu Dhar al Ghaffari and Salman al Farsi; may Allah bless them and have mercy on them.
Leader of the present Iranian revolution and founder of ‘Islamic Democracy’ in his country, Imam Khomeini, who is also regarded as the representative of the last Imam al Gha’ib (hidden or concealed Imam), seeks to set forth the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam as worldly-minded persons, impious, insolent and interpolators of the Qur’an who will not be deemed as believers. He writes in his Kashf-al Asrar:
These persons (the Sahabah) had nothing to do with Islam and the Qur’an, save to utilise these as the means for their worldly gains and holding the helm. For the persons who managed to employ the Qur’an to sub-serve their baser objective, it posed no problem to delete the verses (declaring ‘Ali as the vicegerent of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the principle of Imamah), to make interpolations in the divine Scripture and to put the Qur’an out of sight to the end of time. The charge of corrupting, (the scriptures) laid by the Muslims against the Jews and the Christians is proven against these companions.
He says elsewhere in the same book:
Suppose that Imam had been mentioned by name in the Qur’an, than how does it help us to conclude that there would have been no differences among the Muslims. Those who had leagued with Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam faith owing to their greed for power and position and were conspiring since long to enrol their supporters, would have never given up their ulterior ends because of the Qur’anic injunctions. They would have adopted every device to achieve their objectives, or in that case the differences created would have been of such a nature that the very foundations of the religion would have been demolished. For the possibility was that if those who were after wielding the sceptre had realised that they would not achieve their ends through Islam, they would have joined hands to form a clique against Islam and openly defied it.
‘Allamah Khomeini’s Kashf al Asrar contains numerous derogatory remarks about the first three Khulafaʼ and other Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, too sacrilegious to be cited here. One can refer to the book or read Molana Manzur Nu’mani’s Shi’iyat Kya Hai, if anybody wants to know more about it.
I cannot do better than give the reactions of Muhsin-al Mulk, the author of Ayat-e Bayyinat which reflects the burning reflections of the author who had found out the truth after a deep study of the subject. Every man endowed with common sense will reach the same conclusion if he dispassionately thinks about the matter.
The truth is that the belief entertained by the Shia about the Sahabah casts a doubt on nubuwwah and makes one sceptical of Islam. If anybody comes to hold a view that all those who gave their faith to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were really disbelievers; they pretended to be Muslims but they were infidels, in their hearts of hearts; and they fell away as soon as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam closed his eyes; cannot acknowledge his nubuwwah. He can ask that if Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was truly the messenger of Allah, his teachings would have surely impressed at least a few persons and made a dent in their hearts. Who believed in him out of more than hundred thousand persons swearing fealty to him? At least a few hundreds would have remained faithful to him! If the Sahabah were not perfect in faith, as you wrongly assert, then who are the persons on whom the teachings of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had left a lasting impression? How many were they who profited by his nubuwwah? If, Allah forbid, all barring the few to be counted on one’s fingers were hypocrites and apostates, then who gave faith to Islam and who were those who derived any benefit from the teachings of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam?
Imam Sha’bi (d. 110/728) has made a trenchant remark on the attitude of the Shia. He says:
Jews and Christians are more well-disposed towards their prophets of Allah. The Jews were asked: “Who were most virtuous amongst you?” They replied: “Those accompanying Musa ‘alayh al Salam.” The Christians were similarly asked: “Who were the best in faith amongst you?” They replied: “The disciples of ‘Isa ‘alayh al Salam.” But when the Shia were asked: “Who were the worst amongst you?” They gave the answer: “They were the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”
It seems that the Shia of Iranian stock had assumed that the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were men of the same kidney as the greedy and selfish worldly-minded adventurers belonging to the Pahlavi, Kiyani, Safawid and Qachar dynasties of their country. If it is correct that the forefathers of Imam Khomeini had migrated from Oudh in India to Iran, then he must have taken the venerable Sahabah for those petty but scheming and litigant landed gentry of that region who were wont to go to any length for realisation of their petty interests. Verily Allah has already declared:
ذٰلِكَ مَبْلَغُهُمْ مِّنَ الْعِلْمِ ؕ اِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ اَعْلَمُ بِمَنْ ضَلَّ عَنْ سَبِیْلِهٖۙ وَ هُوَ اَعْلَمُ بِمَنِ اهْتَدٰی
This is their attainment of knowledge: Surely your Lord knows very well those who have gone astray.
 The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, op. cit., vol. V., p. 399.
 ‘Ali ibn al Athir, Tarikh al Kamil, (Leyden, 1867-74) vol. II. p. 423.
 Jalal al din Suyuti, Tarikh al Khulafaʼ, Maktabah al Sa’adah, Egypt 1952. p. 78.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate. op. cit., p. 120 – 22.
 Ibid, p. 119; Muhammad Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat al Kabir, Beirut. 1968. vol. III. p. 131.
 A Short History of Saracens, op. cit., p. 39.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate, op. cit., p. 207-8.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate, op. cit., p. 236.
 A Short History of the Saracens, op. cit., p. 21.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate, op. cit., p. 65, 416.
 Ibid. p. 123.
 Peak of Eloquence, op. cit., p. 57.
 Ibid, op. cit., p. 260 and 270.
 Muhib al Din al Tabari, (d. 694/1295), Al Riyad al Nadirah fi Fadaʼil al ’Asharah, (MSS No. 1784, Nadwat al ’Ulama Library), pp. 126-27, 187-88.
 A Short History of the Saracens, op. cit., p.46.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate, op. cit., p. 336.
 Peak of Eloquence, op. cit., p. 61.
 Annals of the Early Caliphate, op. cit., p. 341.
 Ibid, p. 341.
 Surah al Fath: 29
 The Spirit of Islam, op. cit., p. 22.
 Sahih Bukhari, Matba’ Mustafa, Al Babi Al Halabi, Egypt, 1953, Vol. II, p. 184 (Chap. Characteristics of the Prophet).
 Husam al Din ‘Ali al Muttaqi, Kanz al ’Ummal, Vol, VII, p. 105.
 A Shirt and overskirt made of the same but costly cloth. It was highly valued by Arabs.
 Kanz al ’Ummal, Vol. VII, p. 105; Ibn Hajar, Al Isabah, Vol. I, p. 333.
 Shibli No’mani, Al Faruq, 1956, Vol. II, p. 269 (cited from Kitab al Khiraj by Abu Yusuf, pp. 24-25)
 Annals of Early History, op. cit., p. 276. For a detail discussion on the controversy relating to it see Ayat-e Bayyinat (Mirzapur, 1870) Vol, I, pp. 127-162.
 Abbas Mahmud al ’Aqqad, ‘Abqariyat al Imam, (Dar al Futuh, Cairo, 1957), p. 956.
 Ibn Taymiyyah, Hafiz Ahmed Taqi al Din, Minhaj al Sunnat al Nabawiyyah (Cairo. 1321 A.H.), Vol. III, p 242.
 It is hardly necessary to mention here how the seemly influence of Muhammad’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam nubuwwah produced countless miens as glittering gems. In different ages and places such godly souls were born among the followers of the last Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who were able to change the morals and behaviour of the sinners and criminals just by casting a glance at them. No sooner than the wicked and perverted people came to their contact, that their behaviour and morals were entirely changed and they became virtuous and Allah-fearing. There are instances when a dissolute man would happen to pass a night with them and he would become pure of heart by the dawn. This has happened even centuries after the era of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and in far-off lands like India. One can, for instance, go through Sayed Ahmed Shahid—His life and Mission (published by the Academy of Islamic Research and Publications) to know more about such paradigms of spiritual perfection.
 Fur’u’ al Kafi (Vol. III, entitled Kitab al Rowdah), Lucknow, p. 115. Another report includes ‘Ammar also in the list of exceptions.
 Kashf-al Asrar, p. 114.
 Kashf-ul-Asrar, pp. 113-114.
 Sayed Mahdi ‘Ali (1253-1325 A.H.) son of Sayed Damin ‘Ali Hussaini, honoured with the title Nawab Muhsin al Mulk and Nawaz Jang, was an eminent leader and reformer. Highly educated and liberal in his attitude, he renounced the Shia creed to accept the faith of the Ahlus Sunnah. He took up service under the then Hyderabad state in 1291 A.H., at the invitation of Nawab Mukhtar al Mulk and was responsible for making far-reaching reforms in the state administration. He went to England in 1305 A.H./1786 A.D. and thenceforth became a close friend of Sayed Ahmed Khan. He was elected Secretary of the Madrasah al ’Uloom, Aligarh and Muslim Educational Conference in 1315/1797 and held that office for the rest of his life. He was instrumental in progress of the college which eventually became a Muslim University. He had an impressive personality and was a prolific writer. Ayat-e Bayyinat, one of his creations, had immortal fame.
 Ayat-e Bayyinat, Mirzapur, 1870, Vol. I, pp. 6-7.
 Minhaj al Sunnah, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 6.
 Surah al Najm: 30.